MS, on thin skinned game you may be right about light for caliber expanding bullets. I think the problem arises with a less than perfect presentation of the animal. If you are prepared to pass on the shot then I would think there is no problem, however, why do it unless it is the only accurate load your gun will shoot? I just worked up a load (it was very easy!) using the Speer 160 grain semi jacketed bullet (jacketed soft point) and 2400. This is a fairly stout load, but X ring accurate at 25 yards out of my 686 and a red dot sight. I need to try it at 50 yards. If I had to use my 357, that's the combination I would use.
Never killed anything with a handgun though, so the above is just what I have read!
Peter

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:Never killed anything with a handgun though, so the above is just what I have read!
Peter

Peter, we need to get you hunting with a handgun!! What are you waiting for? Try it, you'll definitely like it!

I'm talking about the use of heavy for caliber cast bullets that will penetrate, and the responses I've seen are comparing 125 JHPs that did what they were designed to do; expand more than penetrate.

I'd like to know why a 200 grain .401" diameter cast bullet at 1,300 fps will punch a hole through a deer, but a 173 grain .358" diameter cast bullet at 1,375 fps (.38-44 caliber)is all of a sudden useless against a deer and shooting a deer with one is a stunt. I know for a fact the 358429 will penetrate deer on a broadside shot while breaking the shoulders. A broadside lung shot is no challenge whatsoever for this bullet, even when getting down around the 900 fps velocity.

This Whitworth, is the topic I'd like discussed. No name calling or throwing out the "e" word; just some serious discussion.

Dang, what did I do this time??

Should I go sit in a corner? Perhaps I should go to my room without dinner......

Did I tell you that I am having my .454 SRH converted to a seven-shot .38 special?? I'm serious.

You are such a tease!!

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
You are such a tease!!

Hey, I've been called worse.......

Shooting a deer with a .38 spec. is a stunt that would not be undertaken by an ethical hunter. I certainly hope no young hunters read this.

See swamp, this is exactly what I said I did not want to see; short sighted knee-jerk reactions and statements. How much experience are you basing your statement on? Is your post from what you have read in the rags, internet sites,or have you actually gone out and shot something?

Personally, I like larger caliber handguns for the larger holes they are capable of delivering. That said, I am not a big proponent of high velocity, and the .38 special is in no danger of delivering a lot of speed anyhow. With the proper bullet, capable of good penetration, I don't see why it can't kill something as thin-skinned as a deer. It will make a .35-caliber hole which in rifle terms is a medium bore.......

That said, I still prefer bigger-bores........

Point well made Whitworth.

And swampshooter, just what is your threshold for being an unethical hunter? Does the deer need to expire before a certain distance? What if someone shoots a deer with a .300 Win Mag and it runs 300 yards before expiring; does that make the person an unethical hunter?

I have to agree with swampshooter here. I don't think a .38 should be used for deer hunting at all, and I do not need to shoot a bunch of deer with a 38 to make that statement. Not a knee jerk reaction either.

Yea there are people that have done it, and there are people that shoot deer with 22 L/R's and kill deer. But that does not make it a good choice for hunting.

MS Hitman, as far as the ethics part in your example, we can give many examples of animals wounded with just about any firearm or round, but that does not take away from the fact that a 38 is a poor choice of a round to use for deer hunting.

I am glad some State's have a minimum calibers listed for big game hunting, it keeps people from trying to use guns not adequate for the task.

That is how I feel and nobody will change it.

Okay, I can understand how folks think the .38 just "ain't enuff", but does the added velocity of the .357 magnum make it more acceptable in folks' minds?

I would not use a 357 Mag either. But without getting into another pissing contest, velocity matters. Sorry you don't subscribe to that.

Like I said before, I am sure someone with little common sense has used it with success, and now they believe it is a viable cartridge for hunting.

If you think it is such a good idea, why in the world are you using a 475 Linebaugh on deer?

Redhawk, go back and read what I wrote as I clearly stated that I prefer larger calibers. I thought I made myself very clear on this matter. That said, I think it is more than doable with the right bullet.

Redhawk,

I don't believe Whitworth ever stated he thought the .38 Special to be a viable deer cartridge. If it's my common sense you are questioning; don't worry yourself, it's rather sound. If you are uncomfortable using a .38 Special or .357 Magnum just say so. It's good for a man to know his limitations; just don't try to impose them on others who don't roll over so easily. For those who wish to have the fish & game departments dictate what you hunt with caliber-wise, more power to you.

Pondoro Taylor didn't subscribe to velocity, nor do I. It flattens trajectory and creates a sense of urgency and vitality in the uninformed, but the big heavy bullets do the real work. Taylor said of muzzle energies, it is used to sell ever larger rifles to those whom not know any better. I believe the man had a firm grasp on reality.

The truth of the matter is, the deer I shot with the .38-40 which everyone appeared to think was a fine deed would have been every bit as dead from a 358429 launched from either a standard .38 Special or the .38-44 ammo I load for my Model 28. These bullets do not magically bounce off a deer's side because they are 36 caliber. Am I saying it is my preferred round or hunting revolver, no. I have larger calibers which are better suited to the task as does everyone else. I am saying that if all I had was a .38 Special, I'd still be eating venison while others would be discussing the unethicalness of the situation.

I think I'm going to have to dust off my Model 36 and develop some SERIOUS loads for it.......

MS Hitman My hunting experience covers 50 years, i've hunted in almost every state in the union, mexico, canada, and africa. I've taken well over 100 deer, including two with the .357 mag. Both deer shot with the .357 went a long ways, and one wasn't found until a week later. Hit center between briscut and spine ( a center lung hit) with a kieth style 158 semi-wadcutter at a chronographed velocity of 1250fps. It left almost no blood trail and went over a half mile.The other was hit in the same place with a 140 Speer hollow point loaded to 1325 fps. This deer, both were does of about 135 lbs., went close to a 1/4 mile. again almost no blood trail and the only reason we found it was that it stayed on the same trail. I've never had a deer hit in the same or close to the same place with my 7x57 go more than 50 yds. or so. Just because somebody killed an elephant with a 6.5x54 doesn't make it an ethical elephant cartridge. I stand by my statement that to shoot deer with a .38 spec. is unethical and if you disagree you still have a lot to learn and don't care if game is left to suffer a slow death. Shame on you.

Considering venison is most of the meat we eat around my house, leaving them in the woods doesn't benefit any other than the coyotes and worms. I still have a lot to learn, but not because I disagree with you. Shame on yourself.

MS Hitman, my comments were a general statement, and if you or anyone else took offence to it, maybe they should.

Like I said, and I will repeat it so you understand it this time. I am sure the 38 special will kill deer, so will a 22 L/R, but that does not make it a viable hunting round now does it?

I am more that sure I can kill deer with a 38 special or the 375 Mag, the 357 Mag is what I used when I started using a handgun for hunting, over 25 years ago. And yes I did kill a number of deer with the 357 Mag. I used the proper bullet and enough velocity to drive the bullet through the deer. I also kept my shots under 50 yards. Not because that was the range I was comfortable with, but that is what I feel the effective range of the 357 Mag is.

If indeed you actually think velocity does not matter, why do you even own a gun over a 38 special?


I think I have kill enough animals to know what works for me. I don't need to read Pondoro Taylor or anyone else's ideals on how velocity or energy works or does not work. Actual experience beats the hell out of a thousand opinions.

No where did I say a 38 special bullet would bounce off a deer, that was your attempt at sarcasm. I just think it is not a wise choice for a hunting round. And a lot of the reason I have a problem is, people will try to use it at longer ranges than what the cartridge would be effective at. There is a lot of hunters that need a lot of help when it comes to what ranges certain cartridges are effective at. A lot of them want to push the limit's.

Also I did not say Whitworth thought the 38 special was a viable cartridge, I said someone that has used the 38 for deer hunting.
My question to Whitworth was "If you think it is such a good idea, why in the world are you using a 475 Linebaugh on deer?"

I already knew the answer to the question, I know Whitworth likes big hole in game. And I am glad he uses enough gun to get the job done, and I am sure he is also a very good shot with his gun of choice.

If I don't agree with the 38 special being used for hunting, that is my opinion, just like you think it is as your opinion. If you think because I don't use a 38 for deer hunting I won't be eating venison while others would be discussing the unethicalness of the situation, you are wrong. I used the right cartridge to get the job done, and I too am eating venison, while others would be discussing the ethics of the situation.

Time to take my pain meds....

I see that no matter how we try, we end up with many of us subscribing that both velocity and energy are issues that, REGARDLESS OF YOUR PERSONAL FEELINGS AND OF JESUS' FEELINGS ABOUT THEM, matter. Dr. Benjamin Spock believed in wearing a kids ass out in the 1940's and it created a mannerly generation of kids. Then he mellowed and in 1970 said that corporal punishment damaged the fragile psyche of a kid and now we have a generation that would rather play frisbee and sit on the computer than hunt and fish. So which one of Spocks statements do you guys subscribe to?

We ALL know that a deer struck in the temple with a hammer will likely die spontaneously as long as the VELOCITY of the hammer head is sufficent to produce enough ENERGY. Now whether a 10 ounce ball peen will work better than a 5 pound sledge is going to be the next debate.

PERSONALLY, I think anyone using a .38 or a .357 Mag is either too poor to own a better firearm for hunting OR is on an ego trip. Still, the .357 Maximum is not objectionable to me. The reason? Velocity. But that's just my opinion.

Now ethics. You know ethics is a word tossed rather freely around hunting circles today. Much like "fair chase", it all has some degree of effectiveness. My "ethics" many not match yours. Some people (pin head Tred Barta being #1) say that "anyone" hunting bears over bait is "unethical". I grew up in the Carolina swamps where people disappear from view at 4 feet, but I hear midwesterners claiming that "anyone who hunts deer with dogs" is "unethical". I have seen people shoot wounded pheasants on the ground to keep them from getting into cover but then loudly proclaim that "anyone" who shoots a pheasant on the ground is "unethical". No matter how it's rationalized, "ethics" is a personal decision and if the practice is LEGAL, who am I to make a judgement call on someone else. By MY PERSONAL ETHICS, using a .38 or .357 Mag would be UNETHICAL TO ME. You have to make your own decisions on this one, but it won't be based on me calling YOU unethical.

TRED BARTA!!!! HEE, HEE, HAAAWW, HAAAWW, darn George, you just made my day!

quote:

Originally posted by swampshooter:
MS Hitman My hunting experience covers 50 years, i've hunted in almost every state in the union, mexico, canada, and africa. I've taken well over 100 deer, including two with the .357 mag. Both deer shot with the .357 went a long ways, and one wasn't found until a week later. Hit center between briscut and spine ( a center lung hit) with a kieth style 158 semi-wadcutter at a chronographed velocity of 1250fps. It left almost no blood trail and went over a half mile.The other was hit in the same place with a 140 Speer hollow point loaded to 1325 fps. This deer, both were does of about 135 lbs., went close to a 1/4 mile. again almost no blood trail and the only reason we found it was that it stayed on the same trail. I've never had a deer hit in the same or close to the same place with my 7x57 go more than 50 yds. or so. Just because somebody killed an elephant with a 6.5x54 doesn't make it an ethical elephant cartridge. I stand by my statement that to shoot deer with a .38 spec. is unethical and if you disagree you still have a lot to learn and don't care if game is left to suffer a slow death. Shame on you.

Interesting that you had such trouble on Deer with the 357 mag.
Years ago brfore that I found out that the 357 was ineffective on game I killed a lot of hogs up to about 200 to 225 pounds with the 357 and the ols Speer 160 Semi Wadcutter 1/2 jacket wiith a health dose of 2400. I never lost one nor did I have a problem put them down. The 357 mag work very well for me. Now the 9mm was another story, the hogs went 60 to 80 yards and were pretty much done but I put a finnisher in them any way.

Again, I will state up front that I like big holes -- really big holes, but if a .358 caliber bullet has enough steam to pass through, why is it unethical or a stunt? Just curious. And let's try to leave emotion out of it.

quote:

I think I have kill enough animals to know what works for me. I don't need to read Pondoro Taylor or anyone else's ideals on how velocity or energy works or does not work. Actual experience beats the hell out of a thousand opinions.

Are you saying that Taylor didn't have enough experience? I'd venture that Taylor had 10 times the expereince and experience is what his observations were based on.

C'mon guys, no pissing matches!
I have had deer run too far, shot with my 45-70 BFR with WLN and WFN boolits. Do I say the caliber is no good???? NO!
What happens is the boolit is too fast and the pressure wave in front of the boolit is moving the lungs out of the way so that the nose is not cutting or mashing. THE BOOLIT IS TOO HARD and needs expansion to slow down in the deer so it does work. Velocity is hurting me because the extra energy is not being used.
The 300 gr Hornady HP puts deer down FAST so I need to make my cast boolit work better.
Now too much expansion might take the 45-70 to the range of deer going too far again.
I have enough boolit weight so when the perfect balance of internal damage and penetration is found it will always put deer down fast without destroying meat. I see first hand that energy dump is not happening just because my boolit is fast. Velocity and muzzle energy just does not kill animals. But the effective working range is there with the 45-70. It will do anything and kill anything.
Some of you quote velocities of your boolits and it means little to me. WHAT DID THE BULLET/BOOLIT DO in the animal.
To choose a caliber where the bullets are not heavy enough to reliably make a large primary wound channel and still penetrate is foolish. The choice of effective bullets for the .38 and .357 on deer is very small, too small to say the guns are reliable. The added velocity of the .357 just does not make it better if the bullet fails to work. The actual fact is that too high a velocity with the wrong bullet makes it FAIL.
Many animals were shot with the .357 to show how POWERFUL it was back in the dark ages of revolvers. Smart hunters are NOT impressed. It is a good man stopper and that is all I will say about it. You will never see me hunting with the thing. To go down to the .38 is just a stunt!
Have someone toss a 30# watermelon in your face, then hit you with a grape at 5 times the speed, which one hurts?
Throw a pointed stick through an animal at 300 fps, then stab it with the same pointed stick, does one kill faster? Put a blade on the end and both kill just the same.
Then the stupid comments like "stand there and let me shoot you in the chest with my .38, tell me if it hurts" Of course it hurts and I might die, but I will also put 2 or 3 of my .475's in you before I fall. I don't want poked with a pointed stick either!
All the talk about how great the .357 killed some animals and then someone else pipes up about how poor it worked just does not sink in. IT IS NOT RELIABLE, it has failed for many guys. Then the retort "Put the bullet where it counts." Great thinking! That means that if I jam the muzzle of a .25 auto through a deer's eye before I pull the trigger, it is the perfect hunting gun!
Why in the world the little guns are even talked about on this forum baffles me when all you need is a .44 or .45. Put the little things where they belong, concealed carry.
If I was an outfitter and you showed up with a .38 to hunt deer, I would send you packing.
Oh, I forget, some of you are such fantastic shots that nothing ever gets away!

No pissing contest at all. Food for thought and civil and intelligent conversation. We all agree that a .35-caliber hole is smaller than what most of us like, but a .243 makes an even smaller hole. Even with an expanding bullet that .243 isn't making a huge hole. So, I think you are missing the point. The .38 loaded with the right bullet will more than likely reliably pass right through a deer and a deer isn't that hard to punch a hole through. There is no guarantee that a deer shot in the right spot isn't going to run. That last deer you shot with your .45/70 required a bit of tracking if I can recall, and was that a function of the bullet caliber? Velocity? Nose profile? Sometimes they just run and don't want to give up the ghost.......

Whitworth you are right, not every animal will react exactly the same way. You could shoot two different deer with the same round, and get two different reactions. One may drop in it's tracks and one may run 100 yards.

Myself, I will take a big hole that lets out a lot of blood so if I do have to track it, the blood trail is not a hard one to follow.

I get asked all the time what I recommend for guys going hunting for deer with a handgun for the first time. I tell them never go below a 41 Mag. I also tell them to practice a bunch and see what there max range is, and once that they can stay very consistent, and that is the range they should keep when in the field.

And I tell them, no matter how much someone talks up the 357 Mag, don't get it.

All my buddies that handgun hunt use nothing smaller than a 45 Colt.

The .38 is a stunt and I don't think it should be used. That is my opinion and no one will ever change that.

quote:

The .38 is a stunt and I don't think it should be used. That is my opinion and no one will ever change that.

Never let the facts stand in the way, seems that an Elk will succumb to the 357, so why would a Deer not to a 38 Special

quote:

http://shootersforum.com/showt...ighlight=Elk+357+Mag



This cow was shot at about 50 feet. First shot struck the chest from broadside and broke a rib going in. Both lungs were badly damaged. The bullet was found balled up under the hide on far side side. Second bullet struck farther back. The diaphragm was torn and liver damaged. The elk galloped away as if unhurt. I waited about an hour and took up the trail. About 150 yards away, the animal was found dead as Julius Caesar.

This cow elk weighed approx 500 lbs.

357 MAG is certainly no long distance cartridge. But up close, it's up to the task.

tech info: 158 grain hollow tip factory ammo by PMC. Taurus revovler with 6 inch barrel.

Hey, it's called the .38 SPECIAL, not the .38 insignificant or .38 unethical, or .38 stunt -- it's a SPECIAL damnit!

Alex,

Check your post; you're running the 375 Mag down pretty hard. The only problem with it is the brass has to be made from .375 Winchester brass. That 220 Hornady FP is very effective on deer.

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
Alex,

Check your post; you're running the 375 Mag down pretty hard. The only problem with it is the brass has to be made from .375 Winchester brass. That 220 Hornady FP is very effective on deer.

That was a typo it should of read 357 MAG...

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Hey, it's called the .38 SPECIAL, not the .38 insignificant or .38 unethical, or .38 stunt -- it's a SPECIAL damnit!

Actually it is the 38 POS.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Hey, it's called the .38 SPECIAL, not the .38 insignificant or .38 unethical, or .38 stunt -- it's a SPECIAL damnit!

Actually it is the 38 POS.

Now it turns ugly

The predictable direction and temperent of this thread is perfect testament as to why so few actually post on this forum anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Hey, it's called the .38 SPECIAL, not the .38 insignificant or .38 unethical, or .38 stunt -- it's a SPECIAL damnit!

Actually it is the 38 POS.

Based on what, paper ballistics? Experience? Dislike? What did the poor l'il .38 special do to you that you call it a POS? Does it owe you money? Come on, come clean!

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
The predictable direction and temperent of this thread is perfect testament as to why so few actually post on this forum anymore.

Bobby Tomek
No it is because some think everyone is suppose to agree, and go along with what others post. But hay if you all want to blow roses up each others back sides, and not read others opinions, why not only have posts that no one can reply to.

You go to other gun site's and go to handgun hunting forums, and see if other disagree as much as we do here.

What do people want here, a love feast where everyone agrees with each other? How freekin boring would these threads be. I for one can't stand the love feasts.

Whitworth, the 38 special in not a viable hunting round, if you want to be a proponent of it, so be it. But I will not, and nor will I call a 38 special a big game cartridge.

I just can't believe all you guys that spout off about your big bore cartridges, big bullets, etc, would actually buy into a 38 special as a viable hunting cartridge. It is truly amazing how the same guys here will back each other every time with this notion. Amazing...

What is utterly amazing is all this started from a tongue in cheek comment I made on another thread.

Yes, the .38 Special still is a viable hunting cartridge, regardless of personal dislikes, preferences, what have you.

MS Hitman, post your post on other Forums and see how many other people out there would think you are wrong. It is not just me, but I know a lot of people that would disagree with you.

You just have the same guys that agree with you on everything else backing you on this ludicrous notion you have of the 38 being a viable hunting round for big game. Better yet I will post it on other sites, and see what the consensus of other handgun hunters are.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
The predictable direction and temperent of this thread is perfect testament as to why so few actually post on this forum anymore.

Bobby Tomek
No it is because some think everyone is suppose to agree, and go along with what others post. But hay if you all want to blow roses up each others back sides, and not read others opinions, why not only have posts that no one can reply to.

You go to other gun site's and go to handgun hunting forums, and see if other disagree as much as we do here.

What do people want here, a love feast where everyone agrees with each other? How freekin boring would these threads be. I for one can't stand the love feasts.

Whitworth, the 38 special in not a viable hunting round, if you want to be a proponent of it, so be it. But I will not, and nor will I call a 38 special a big game cartridge.

I just can't believe all you guys that spout off about your big bore cartridges, big bullets, etc, would actually buy into a 38 special as a viable hunting cartridge. It is truly amazing how the same guys here will back each other every time with this notion. Amazing...

Lighten up Francis.

The point is not whether or not a .38 special is the ultimate big-game getter, but rather that with a good bullet (heavy for caliber, good nose profile), it can kill like any other caliber by poking a hole all the way through the animal. And if it penetrates reliably -- deeply and in a straight line -- then it is viable. That said, I still prefer bigger holes, but why the complete mental block? No one is suggesting that we have a love "fest" but that we can discuss this without the definitive statements that begin with never, no how, no way, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
MS Hitman, post your post on other Forums and see how many other people out there would think you are wrong. It is not just me, but I know a lot of people that would disagree with you.

You just have the same guys that agree with you on everything else backing you on this ludicrous notion you have of the 38 being a viable hunting round for big game. Better yet I will post it on other sites, and see what the consensus of other handgun hunters are.

Who cares what the other forums think? I don't see how this is relevant. I am not agreeing with Hitman to "back him up" as you suggest, rather he is more open minded and he is presenting a viable argument for the .38 special. I think you are repeatedly missing the point of the feasibilty of this round, or you are simply a contrarian. Go back and read what is being said. NO ONE, and I repeat NO ONE is suggesting that the .38 special should replace the big-bores in your arsenal -- only that loaded right it can be a reliable game getter.