.357 Magnum VS .44 Special for Rocky Mountains trail gun

[Southern Shooter]

If you were limited to one of these two specific calibers, both with 4 inch barrels, which would you choose as a trail/hiking gun in the Rocky Mountains region? Any particular reasons why?

(added after the original post: The .44 Special is a ported gun.)

Thanks

[Love Life]

At this time I would choose the 357 magnum. The reason is I can load it hot, and most importantly, I am very proficient with revolvers I shoot them in.

[1bluehorse]

If you're trying to choose between the two you ALREADY own, I'd go with the 44. Simply put, it shoots a bigger bullet. If you're looking for a gun to BUY for trekking about, I'd choose the 4in Redhawk in 45 colt..

[Dan Cash]

Either one works well. .44 more thump up close, ,357 more reach. Take your p[ick.

[Southern Shooter]

Yes, these are two guns that I already own.

[bowfin]

Cartridge choice between these two would take a backseat to which features you like best on the two handguns.

Which one do you shoot the best? Which one do you like the best?

[runfiverun]

in a 4" gun it would be the 44 special.
unless you plan on wearing earplugs everywhere you go.

[Southern Shooter]

Is the sound level between the two calibers that different?

I should mention that the .44 Special is ported.

I have to admit that all of my .44 Special and .44 Magnum shooting has been done with hearing protection in place. And, 99.9% of my .357 Magnum shooting the same. So, I really can't make an honest comparison between the two calibers' sound level with unprotected hearing.

Thanks

[Char-Gar]

I am one of those rare sixgunners still standing that thinks the .357 Mag is the most useful and versatile hangun around for general use and critters no larger than deer.

[sixshot]

The 357 is a capable gun with correct ammo for your intended use. The 44 special can do anything the 357 can & if need be, its a bigger hammer if things get out of hand. On the same platform its also lighter than the 357 maggie.
The 357 or 38 special loaded in the +P range can be quite loud, the 44 special isn't nearly as bad if you have to take a couple of quick shots without hearing protection.
I prefer penetration over expansion except for my carry guns so hollow points are out for a trail gun. The one you shoot best is always a good idea.

Dick

[bearcove]

I am one of those rare sixgunners still standing that thinks the .357 Mag is the most useful and versatile hangun around for general use and critters no larger than deer.

I agree! A PORTED 44 spec is probably louder and has negligable advantage in bullet weight/ penetration/power.

[Char-Gar]

The 44 Special will not do anything a .357 Magnum can do. The 44 cannot fire 38 Special wadcutter target ammo. This stuff is some of the most useful small game and camp fun ammo around. You could load the 44 down, but can't buy factory ammo that way.

The 357 can use all kinds of full snort mag ammo, all kinds of 38 Special ammo including the wadcutter target ammo.

The man asked about a versatile trail gun. He didn't mention anything about handloading.

[Southern Shooter]

I do hand load. And, I have the equipment to hand load for both .357 Magnum and .44 Special. However, I still am rather new to the world of hand loading.

Would hand loading increase or decrease the gap between these two calibers in terms of a mountain train gun? Heavier bullets in both? More velocity in both? Ect. Ideas from those more experienced than me?

Thanks

[sixshot]

You can also shoot 44 Russian in the special if you choose, & yes you can get it loaded down with factory 44 special, thats how 90% of it comes because of some of the older, weaker specials out there. But, if you choose the 357 maggie you will be well armed, really up to which you like & shoot the best.

Dick

[Southern Shooter]

Of course, there are things like this on the market that could be an option. Thoughts?

(I wonder how this would feel out of a 4" barrel all-steel .357 Magnum....)
45027


Or, Buffalo Bore's version of .44 Special :

Heavy .44 Special Ammo - 255 gr. S.W.C. (Keith-type) G.C.

Real Gun Velocities

1. 6" Ruger .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk
Item #14B - 1044 fps

2. 3.25" S&W Model 396
b. Item #14B - 984 fps

[bowfin]

Just my opinion, but I think that the differences between the two would come down to personal choice.

Since we don't know what you might shoot with the gun next, be it a pop can, food for the table, or an assailant, it would be hard to pick one over the other

[Char-Gar]

I do hand load. And, I have the equipment to hand load for both .357 Magnum and .44 Special. However, I still am rather new to the world of hand loading.

Would hand loading increase or decrease the gap between these two calibers in terms of a mountain train gun? Heavier bullets in both? More velocity in both? Ect. Ideas from those more experienced than me?

Thanks

Here is the truth as I know it to be. If you handload, pick either of the two you like best. I can't come up with any kind of meaningful distinction between the two other than just person preference.

If you do not handload, the 38/357 has a very definite advantage in the range of factory ammo available.

[Stick_man]

Both would be reasonable choices for a trail gun in the Rocky Mtns. A full house .357 in a 4" barrel can be pretty punishing both on the hands and the hearing. A heavy .357 will generally run a 180gr bullet up to about 1100 fps or so out of a 4" barrel. You can get that with the .44special with a 185-200 gr bullet as an upper mid-level load.

Although I love the .357, my personal choice would be the .44 in this case. Bigger diameter bullets make bigger holes. Bigger holes make for faster drainage of blood.

I also agree with what others have stated... the decision should be based on what YOU feel most comfortable with, not what somebody on the internet said would be better.

[bearcove]

I don't think a good trail gun has to be the most powerful possible.

I have shot a lot of things out on the trail. Stopping power was not an issue. Hitting a rabbit or bird and having something left to eat was. I carried a 357 BH for years first two were 38 specials loaded for accuracy the next 3 were 357 swc loaded strong. Never needed the 3 Mags.

I think the gun you shoot best would be the overwhelming criteria.

[Dan Cash]

Of course, there are things like this on the market that could be an option. Thoughts?

(I wonder how this would feel out of a 4" barrel all-steel .357 Magnum....)
45027


Or, Buffalo Bore's version of .44 Special :

Heavy .44 Special Ammo - 255 gr. S.W.C. (Keith-type) G.C.

Real Gun Velocities

1. 6" Ruger .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk
Item #14B - 1044 fps

2. 3.25" S&W Model 396
b. Item #14B - 984 fps

I think you will find this .44 brisk and the .357 very pushy. Both will be manageable.

[Char-Gar]

I don't think a good trail gun has to be the most powerful possible.

I have shot a lot of things out on the trail. Stopping power was not an issue. Hitting a rabbit or bird and having something left to eat was. I carried a 357 BH for years first two were 38 specials loaded for accuracy the next 3 were 357 swc loaded strong. Never needed the 3 Mags.

I think the gun you shoot best would be the overwhelming criteria.

I have spent quite a bit of time in the brush and desert and my choice has always been a 22 LR hangun or a 1911 in 45 ACP. If I had any concern about two legged critters, the 45 got the nod.

[bearcove]

I carried my single six some, but the blackhawk with 38's would shoot a ragged hole at 25 yards. I still have it but it needs to be rebuilt cause I wore it out.

[Doc_Stihl]

I'd carry whichever I shot more accurately and leave it at that. The .357 that hits it's mark is better than anything that misses.

I carry a .357 when I'm in the woods. 8 3/8" 586 doesn't carry lightly and isn't even on the list of my powerful handguns, but I can draw, aim and shoot with no effort and I'm 100% confident in it everytime.

[EDK]

The late Skeeter Skelton said "357 magnum versus 44 special is a good big man beatin' the hell out of a good little man." Clint Smith of Thunder Ranch said something close to "a handgun is not supposed to be comfortable to carry; it is comforting to carry."

I've studied handguns pretty seriously since 1965 and owned a bunch since I got out of the army in 1970. Started with a 357 BLACKHAWK; on to a 44 SUPER; then repeated with double actions; then 45 autos; now back to the VAQUEROS.

I'd take a 44 special double action revolver, loaded with a full wadcutter boolit and a controllable powder charge. (I've got 3 full wadcutter moulds of varying designs and am eyeing the NOE currently available also.) A good holster and belt like my MILT SPARKS HSR and double thickness belt allows carrying my 5 inch S&W 625 or 629 comfortably for all day woodswalking.

Pick out what looks to fulfill your criteria. Get a good belt and holster. Load to the performance level you desire. PRACTICE, PRACTICE and PRACTICE. Then go about your actvities with the cold confidence of a christian with four aces.

:redneck::cbpour::guntootsmiley:

[paul h]

Is the gun to be used solely for defensive purposes, or will it be used for plinking, small game hunting, etc.?

The 357 has been hamstrung by both weak guns and bullets that are less than ideal over the years. If you have a strong 357 i.e. one that is also built as 44 sp and 45 colts, then the 357 can be loaded to levels that will punch a hole clear through any NA game. I've lately been shooting alot of 200 gr WFN's over max +P charges of 2400 in my 4 5/8" blackhawk, and the recoil isn't that bad. Muzzleblast is siginificant!

That said, the 44 sp with a 240 gr cast @ 1000 fps is nothing to sneeze at, and I really don't think on can argue the 357 mag vs. 44 sp makes one a clear winner.

Back to my original question, where the 357 shines is you can carry a box of mild cast loads, say 105 gr swc's loaded to 800-1000 fps for an excellent small game load, and that ammo isn't terribly heavy or bulky. Packing 50 rds of 44sp 240gr is near triple the weight.

Ultimately it comes down to which gun do you shoot more proficiently, as what you can place your shots with is the best choice. Heck, you've got both guns, try packing the 357 one day, and the 44 the next time out. There are times I don't consider my 480 ruger necessary so my 357 blackhawk rides on my hip.

[monge]

4 inch gun is good for 30yards max , you need a big slow moving boolit with lots of stopping power 44sp has my vote!

[paul h]

4 inch gun is good for 30yards max , you need a big slow moving boolit with lots of stopping power 44sp has my vote!

Really??? :roll:

Offhand holding 8" at 50yds with an accurate 4" revolver with a good trigger is not exceptional shooting, doing so at 100yds is just an issue of practice, lots of practice. Mechanically a good revolver will hold 2" at 100 yds, barrel length has nothing to do with mechanical accuracy. My shooting buddy shot a 1" group at 100yds with a 4 5/8" freedom arms 454.

[legend]

My 4inch 357 knocked down the first 5 in a row 200yard rams in the state of south dakota during ihmsa match about 1972,i know because i was behind the trigger.

30 yard gun? hardly.

[canyon-ghost]

Well, I own both. I like my 44 Special better. It's got plenty of thump.



<<<<< That 44 Special

[gunfan]

My 4inch 357 knocked down the first 5 in a row 200yard rams in the state of south dakota during ihmsa match about 1972,i know because i was behind the trigger.

30 yard gun? hardly.


I agree. Jan Libourel called the .357 S&W Magnum "the Mule" when it came to handgun hunting. Properly loaded, a practiced marksman using the 8 3/8" barreled .357 S&W Magnum can, and will, readily take most medium-sized game within 80-100 yards. It takes practice, but it can be accomplished quite routinely.

Scott

[gunfan]

I have long been a devotee of the .41 Remington Magnum as well. It kills cleanly out to 100 yards, with accuracy to which the .44 Magnum can only aspire.

The .41 Mag is an inherently more accurate cartridge, period.

Scott

[9.3X62AL]

I have both calibers, and enjoy both calibers--but the S&W 686 gets the call far more often than the 624. The 686 bucks pretty well with 200 grainers @ 1150-1200 FPS or 180s @ 1250-1300, but it's still controllable. I cast those as "BruceB Softpoints", and have 25 of each on hand--prompted along by Alliant 2400.

I'm in the middle of re-working my carry load duplicators for in-town engagement practice, since my authorizing agency changed to the Federal 125 JHP from the W-W 158 JHP.

[Wayne Smith]

Are you looking for something for safety or for hunting for cooking? For the first I'd choose the 44 Spec and for the second I'd carry the .357 loaded with .38's in at least the first two chambers, depending where I was.

[sixshot]

Legend, you sure that was 1972, I put on the first match ever held in Idaho & I think it was in 1977, I shot my first match in Filmore, Utah on new years eve, 1976, just wondering if there were even USPSA matches that far back, I'm probably wrong.
I also used a 357 maggie at times, I was using a 180 gr rifle bullet in a 38 special case & shooting my 8 3/8's model 27 single shot, shortly after that Elgin changed the rules. I use to travel to Preston, Idaho with him & we would print the bi-monthly Silhouette paper, took us 2 very full days, we did all the layout, captions,etc., articles from all over the country, fun stuff.

Dick

[monge]

I think of a trail gun to be used for self defense and easy carry, in a stressfull situation accuracy is afected that was my point shooting at paper or steel and shooting at a mountain lion are to different things!

[runfiverun]

now,,, i remember why i like my 41 mag black hawk so much.
i have a couple of 357's and a few 44 specials and mags.
seems i take the 41 mostly. [with 41 special loads in the cylinder] and depending on where i'm going if i need more i just go to the 44 mag or 445 with the shorter bbl.

[TomBulls]

Get the .357mag. Even with a short barrel, it has more ft/lbs of energy than a .44Spl. In fact, I was just looking at this the other night and wondering if a .44spl could ever make more sense than a .357mag. The ballistic data just doesn't support it. That's strike one. Hiking/cross country trekking makes me want to carry something that is lighter. .44spl ammo is heavier than .357 ammo, and the revolver that fires it is generally heavier as well. That's strike two. Strike three comes down to affordability and frequency. Not all shops you go to will have .44spl, but ALL of them will have .357mag, .38spl, and .38+P. If you can't take your reloading components on the trail with you, and you probably won't be able to, then you are at the mercy of what the outpost is selling. That's strike three.

Go for the .357mag.

-thomas

[atr]

Yea,,,,use the .357...as Tom Bulls says its got more energy than the 44 spl
and as mentioned before you can pack more rounds of the .357 for the same wt of the 44 spl.
I have both and truth be told I reach for my .357 more often than my .44

[HarryT]

"When in bear country, be loaded for bear."
I'd carry the .44 Special with Elmer Keith's pre 44 magnum loads (this is a hand loading forum). If you need to eat the local wildlife, its much easier to trap game than to shoot it.
When you are wondering if a pound or two makes much difference in your hiking enjoyment, think of the weight our troops have to carry (most of them carrying ammo for a machinegun they don't get to shoot).
Think safety over comfort.

[white eagle]

If you have to rely on store bought ammo strike one
if you think a cartridge is inherently accurate strike two
if you think ammo is heavy, start lifting weights, strike three
I own both and some why not carry one on each hip ??Win,Win

[bearcove]

I agree. Jan Libourel called the .357 S&W Magnum "the Mule" when it came to handgun hunting. Properly loaded, a practiced marksman using the 8 3/8" barreled .357 S&W Magnum can, and will, readily take most medium-sized game within 80-100 yards. It takes practice, but it can be accomplished quite routinely.

Scott

Shot my first whitetail with my 357 BH 6 1/2" At 75 yards. Took a follow up shot as he walked around at about 90. got down of the tree I was sitting on walked over and the deer died as I walked up. 2 holes about an inch and a half apart. Fired from a poor position, basically over my right shoulder. Leaned back and shot.

Rod

[bearcove]

I now carry my BH 4 5/8 in 41 mag. I think its better than both the 357 and 44 spec. Same as a 44 mag. Like it too.

[jabo52521]

A Superblackhawk or Redhawk in 44 mag wold be my first choice. Had them both for over 20 years. Kind of used to them now.

[TomBulls]

I do hand load. And, I have the equipment to hand load for both .357 Magnum and .44 Special. However, I still am rather new to the world of hand loading.

Would hand loading increase or decrease the gap between these two calibers in terms of a mountain train gun? Heavier bullets in both? More velocity in both? Ect. Ideas from those more experienced than me?

Thanks

That's an easy one to answer. Just get out your reloading manual. I'm assuming that you do have one or that you can find one somewhere. Check out the data for various bullet weights, and I'm sure you'll agree that the .357 provides more ft/lbs of energy at nearly every bullet weight. Granted, a direct comparison to .357cal and a .430cal gets a little tricky but the math doesn't lie.

-thomas

[williamwaco]

I am one of those rare sixgunners still standing that thinks the .357 Mag is the most useful and versatile hangun around for general use and critters no larger than deer.


I may be the other one.

I am with Char-Gar in this discussion.


.

[1Shirt]

I woould consider the weight of each as a major consideration. At the end of the day from 10-12 mi. the difference in a pound or so between a 357 and a 44 makes an appreciable difference. I would accordingly go with 357. Regardless, I would hope to never HAVE to use the weapon.
1Shirt!

[paul h]

That's an easy one to answer. Just get out your reloading manual. I'm assuming that you do have one or that you can find one somewhere. Check out the data for various bullet weights, and I'm sure you'll agree that the .357 provides more ft/lbs of energy at nearly every bullet weight. Granted, a direct comparison to .357cal and a .430cal gets a little tricky but the math doesn't lie.

-thomas

Foot pounds of energy are almost meaningless in regards to comparing the terminal performance of a given round. You can load a 357 with a 125 gr hp or a 180 gr hard cast, both to the same energy, and the terminal performance will be vastly different between those two loads.

Assuming that we are talking about strong guns and cast bullet loads, the 357 mag is going to at it's best drive a 200 gr cast 1100-1200 fps out of a 4" barrel. The 44 sp will drive a 250 gr cast bullet 1000-1100 fps out of a 4" barrel. If we assume the meplat does the work, comparing frontal areas of 75 % meplats the 357 has a .267" dia , and a 44 lfn has a .322" meplat. That equates to 45% more area for the 44 bullet. The 44 bullet is 25% heavier than the 357 bulllet.

As much as I like the 357, I think given cast bullets at 1000-1100 fps, the 44 sp is going to be the more effective round on game. A 250 gr cast is enough bullet in the 44 to penetrate through most game animals on a broadside shot, and it is going to create a larger dia wound than the 357 bullet.

[white eagle]

I agree Paul
I am a dedicated 44 fan
however neither is worth a hoot in as others have said
If ya caint hit what yer aimin"at
dedicated carry gun for me would be a 44 mag or preferably my 48o rug\
and being i would be protecting myself and possibly family and friends weight of the rounds
would not even factor into the equation
however the op wanted to know between the special and Maggie between those I would go
with a special with Elmer's loads
I do not believe with the 44 mag being in service that today's loading manuals even list a heavy charge for the 44 special

[Stick_man]

That's an easy one to answer. Just get out your reloading manual. I'm assuming that you do have one or that you can find one somewhere. Check out the data for various bullet weights, and I'm sure you'll agree that the .357 provides more ft/lbs of energy at nearly every bullet weight. Granted, a direct comparison to .357cal and a .430cal gets a little tricky but the math doesn't lie.

-thomas


The flaw in this thinking is that you are comparing bullets of the same weight for two different calibers. Where a 185-200gr bullet is at the top end of the .357's usable weight range, it is at the bottom end of the usable range for the .44spl. You could also say that a 185gr .357 will have a better BC than the 185gr .44 and you would be absolutely correct. Now, let's compare a mid-range weight for the .44 and see how the .357 stacks up. How fast and how much energy can you extract from a 250gr .357mag with a 4" barrel? You are still getting nearly 500 ft/lbs muzzle energy out of the .44spl with a 250gr boolit.

Bottom line is both make excellent trail guns. Unless you are in an area with really big bears, either will work fine in a SD situation.

[9.3X62AL]

Could someone please start the popcorn? :)

As before, I like both calibers--a lot. Neither is a bad choice, nor is the 41 Magnum or 45 Colt. The 686 x 4" is my choice because I am most familiar with it and with its caliber. I fire the 686 at least twice a month, and have done so since I bought it 12 years ago. I trust the revolver and its caliber implicitily. I respectfully DISAGREE ENTIRELY with the idea that a 4" revolver is maxed out at 30 yards.

I should note that the 686 is often accompanied by either a shotgun and/or a rifle when we go afield or into the back-country. If city environments are being visited, the Glock 23 and its mag capacity (x3) gets the nod.

[TomBulls]

Assuming that we are talking about strong guns and cast bullet loads, the 357 mag is going to at it's best drive a 200 gr cast 1100-1200 fps out of a 4" barrel. The 44 sp will drive a 250 gr cast bullet 1000-1100 fps out of a 4" barrel. If we assume the meplat does the work, comparing frontal areas of 75 % meplats the 357 has a .267" dia , and a 44 lfn has a .322" meplat. That equates to 45% more area for the 44 bullet. The 44 bullet is 25% heavier than the 357 bulllet.

Excellent point... Thanks for posting, I had not thought of that.


-thomas

[bearcove]

Is the question which is more powerful or which is the best trail gun.

If power is the only yardstick then EVERYONE "needs" a 500 S&W and of course the requisite trailer to haul it on.

When I was young an excellent trail gun was a S&W kit gun, had one loved it. AND I always felt armed when I carried it.

[legend]

SIXSHOT, i could be wrong but i believe it was 1972-1973.

A capt john adams was at the first match,(i think it was in arizona) and came running back to rapid city to put together our first match.i was in the USAF and john was a captain on the base at ellsworth. he used an automag,and i used a xp-100 in 221 fireball...we didnt hit much the first couple months..but we got a lot better as we learned we did not NEED horsepower.

i too used the speer 180 and a 38special case(great minds think alike).

[429421Cowboy]

Foot pounds of energy are almost meaningless in regards to comparing the terminal performance of a given round. You can load a 357 with a 125 gr hp or a 180 gr hard cast, both to the same energy, and the terminal performance will be vastly different between those two loads.

Assuming that we are talking about strong guns and cast bullet loads, the 357 mag is going to at it's best drive a 200 gr cast 1100-1200 fps out of a 4" barrel. The 44 sp will drive a 250 gr cast bullet 1000-1100 fps out of a 4" barrel. If we assume the meplat does the work, comparing frontal areas of 75 % meplats the 357 has a .267" dia , and a 44 lfn has a .322" meplat. That equates to 45% more area for the 44 bullet. The 44 bullet is 25% heavier than the 357 bulllet.

As much as I like the 357, I think given cast bullets at 1000-1100 fps, the 44 sp is going to be the more effective round on game. A 250 gr cast is enough bullet in the 44 to penetrate through most game animals on a broadside shot, and it is going to create a larger dia wound than the 357 bullet.

Very well said. In my line of thinking from years of Keith's preaching, a 250 gr solid bullet won't ruin much meat on small game, will hold together for a head shot on game, and will make a nice big round hole, no expansion needed! Here in Montana i probably would prefer boolit weight over speed in the event i needed it for something nasty. And i also carry a 45 oz SBH with me everywhere with no ill effects so far, so weight difference is moot to me, comfort/comfortable again.
But in this instance i would likely pick the .357, the ammo weight/weight of the gun/power level all outweigh the draw backs to a ported gun that i couldn't carry as much ammo for. If it was .357 vs .41/.44/.45 mags i would have a much harder time choosing.
But the reality is your probably more likely to be put in a situation to have to shoot food before you would need to shoot a bear or anything that's trying to eat you, in which case the gun that was accurate and you could carry more ammo for would win every time in my eyes.

[tuckerdog]

for a trail gun I prefer something starting with a 4. The 44 spcl can (in the right revolver) be loaded to keith levels and work as well as a handgun can work for large predators or loaded down with roundnose boolits for small game.

[scattershot]

I am a fan of heavy bullets. That said, I think either would serve you well, and the choice becomes which pistol you would prefer to carry. I like my Charter Arms Bulldog .44 special, but that's mostly because it's light and unobtrusive. The chance of running into a pack of wolves or a grizz is Pretty remote in my particular stretch of the Rockies, and I don't do much plinking actually n the trail. I agree about the ear-splitting crack of the .357, and that may be a concern for you. For most actual needs wandering in the woods, a .22 works just fine.

[MT Gianni]

Northern Rockies the 44 wins, southern the 357 all IMO. Neither is a bad choice, only you and your research will let you know what you might encounter.

[lead chucker]

If it was solely for personal protection your shots would be up close and personal so I would take the 44. I have a red hawk 44 mag and shoot mostly 44 special velocity loads in it and it does quite well. (Love that gun) even shot a couple snow shoe hairs with it. It doesn't blow them up you would think. Now the 44 mag loads are a different story.

[giz189]

yep, 44 spl loaded up with Elmers load. In some of his books, he states he preferred the 4" bbl rather than longer.

[Olevern]

AS said here before, if you need to protect yourself (bear or human predator) it would be up close and personal. Obviously, if the bear is at fifty yards it is not a self protection scenario. Therefore, I would choose the 44 spl., handloaded appropriately (Ruger or Smith) for it's wider meplat and effectiveness close in. 44 spl has been chambered in Taurus (some ported) and in the older Colt single actions and I don't know if I'd feel comfortable hot-loading these. No experience with Taurus and wouldn't want to ruin my Colt, which wasn't made for that kind of abuse.

If large bear were not a consideration, I would opt for the smaller .357 as it would handle self protection from human predators and could be loaded down in 38 spl guise for other trail use (plinking, small game harvest); also, ammo would weigh less.

[larryp]

I woould consider the weight of each as a major consideration. At the end of the day from 10-12 mi. the difference in a pound or so between a 357 and a 44 makes an appreciable difference. I would accordingly go with 357. Regardless, I would hope to never HAVE to use the weapon.
1Shirt!

Thing is that there are guns that have both chamberings available on the same frame and in those the .44 is actually lighter by way of thinner barrel and cylinder. For instance my Colt SAA in .44 special is lighter than the same gun in .357 mag. Your argument is valid if you're carrying a .44 magnum loaded with specials but not like I said for the Colt SAA or the new .44 Special Ruger Flattops which are built on the old .357 frame.

[1bluehorse]

:bigsmyl2: Boy, you guys have me all confused now...a couple days ago the OP was asking about a couple particular bullets in 45 cal. for traversing the Rockys and everyone (well pretty much) was sayin "take the big one", bigger hole, more penetration, biggers better." " A 360gr. at 950fps is better than a 270gr at 1200" and now it seems the 357 has become a caliber of choice for many to "hike" the nether regions of the great Rocky Mtns. where most have said in the past you'd want at least a 900 magnum cause of the "charging thingy".Now some are saying a 200gr. in 357 at 1100fps is as good or better than a 240 or 250gr from a 44spl at the same speed.. maybe, I don't think so..I think I need a program....:popcorn:

[Southern Shooter]

Have many of ya'll read Linebaugh's thoughts about heavy bullets?

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/heavyweight_bullets.htm

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/high_pressure_loads.htm

[RevGeo]

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. The result of a hit from either caliber will be so close to the same as to be indistinguishable (is that a word?).
I think it would come down to which gun you prefer.
Both are, of course, excellent cast bullet rounds. I carry a .357, but if a good .44 Special would have come along when I bought the .357 I probably would have bought it instead, just because it would be cool to have a different caliber than most.

[helice]

This has been an interesting post. Southern Shooter, I thank you for starting this one. I am amazed that so many are in favor of the 357. I have long been a proponent of greater boolit diameter and weight as the only real constants in a handgun load. I believe in big meplats. I believe that big meplats make big holes and big hole drain out life faster. That said, I have a 38 caliber mould that drops an LBT Ogival wadcutter that gives my 357 a meplat that rivals a number of 44 caliber moulds including the Keith boolit. It is however, light in weight at 150 grains. I prefer heavier.
I have never had the joy or the luxury of walking the trails of the American Rockies. I envy you. If the critters you meet on these trails are hairy and of mean disposition I recommend the greatest diameter boolit of the heaviest weight with the greatest meplat at a velocity with which you are capable and comfortable. If you are looking for campfire food bring along an S&W 22-32 Kit Gun. My humble opinion.

[9.3X62AL]

MT Gianni made a good point above concerning northern Rockies vs. the southern end of that range. My choice was influenced greatly by local conditions (CA), in which human aggressors are a far more likely opponent than are furry nastycritters. In ZIP Codes where Mr. Griz does business, the Redhawk x 44 would be more comforting, and did in fact get employed about 10 years ago to cover our retreat from a black bear whose berry-patch we were jacking.

2 side-effects of that experience.......

1) Purchase soon thereafter of the CZ-550 in 9.3 x 62

2) ALWAYS having a rifle behind the seat when in the back-country.

[shdwlkr]

I will take my 44 special and 255 grain bullets over my .357 mag and 180 grain bullets any day. Reason being less recoil so I can control it better. No other reason just a personal one.

[45 2.1]

You can beat this to death all you want until your actually there and need that beltgun to get you out of a stressfull situation.......... then you will understand what you should have carried.

[blueeyephil]

In my old "Pistol & Revolver Digest, 2nd Edition", copyright 1979, one Charles A. Skelton wrote an article titled "For the One-Gun Man". He contemplated everything from .22 to 44 mag and came to the conclusion that the 357 mag was the one. He considered mostly for a trail gun or SHTF situation, although back then it was penned as what if the bomb was dropped, and i had to head for the hills. The 357 won because of versatility.

Not quite the question asked, but reminded me of one of my favorite articles. And I think his analysis works for this situation too. The 357 mag is more versatile and the best choice.

Of course you can get a double drop rig and carry both. But wait! Which one for my strong hand?:eek:
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2

[CollinLeon]

Some might argue that a Marlin lever action in .357mag or .44mag might also be an option. At least with it, when you run out of ammo, it still works pretty well as a club. :)

[HarryT]

Elmer Keith, who lived most of his life west of the Rockies, carried a .44 Special loaded with a 250 grain bullet and 18.5 grains of 2400 as his do all gun. And he killed everything from blue grouse to bears with it.
Read his book "Sixguns" published 1955.
If you think the .357 is your best bet, then that's the gun for you. Just remember, it takes a lot more gun to stop a charge than to kill an unsuspecting animal.

[shdwlkr]

Dalyoke
A super air tanker comes to mind, should be enough to make whatever is after you change their mind.

[MasS&W]

+1 for the water pistol.

[sixshot]

Went through Colorado Sunday, on my way to Raton, New Mexico, the fire west of Ft. Collins was going crazy, the winds had to be 25-30 miles per hour & we didn't see any planes, probably because of the wind. Sad thing to see.

Dick

[Grandpas50AE]

If I had to choose between the two, it would be my S&W 24-3 in .44spl. Very pleasant to shoot with all but the stoutest of .44 spl. loads, and with those RCBS 242 gr. SWC's in there on top of 12.5 gr. SR4759 they rock pretty good but not uncomfortably.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I decided to add my .02 to this discussion, not that it makes any difference, as it is kind of a mute point. The topic of the discussion deliberately compared one magnum caliber with the capibility to use lighter loads to a less popular round that is inhearantly more powerful but less available. kind of apples to oranges.

The only real experience I have had with a .357 is when one of my idiot friends fired one inside my car when I was 17! My right ear still rings continuously! So I don't like .357's

The defining point of the arguement is that a .44 Spec can do anything a .357 can do, but not the other way around. Point being you can shoot 180 gr boolits in a .44 on the light end which will yeild similar results to the .357 with 158 gr boolits.

Where the major difference is in on the top end.

A .44 Spec can shoot a 300 gr boolit at 1000 fps and a .357 can't even get close. A 200gr .357 slug is 60% of a 300gr .44 slug. It's like comparing a Porsche to a Buick Station Wagon. The Porsche is faster but the Buick has more momentum (mass times velocity= momentum)

All that said the elephant in the room is why not compare the .357 to the .44 Magnum? It can shoot Specials too. It is just as common as the .357, and the big item,,, it is much more powerful.

Then why not bring rifles into the discussion. There is no comparison whatsoever between the power of a .44 Mag rifle and a .357 mag rifle.

Since I don't like .357's for the above mentioned reason. I just bought a Ruger Super Blackhawk Bisley in .44 magnum and chopped the barrel off to 5". Then I bought a Ruger Blackhawk Bisley in .44 Special with a 4 5/8" barrel. There is 4 OZ difference in the weight of the two guns, but the Special handles much nicer than the big gun.

Both fit into the same holster. Both use the same boolits, both shoot really well.

I can load 190gr SWC's in Special cases and shoot them in both guns I have 250 gr loads both mild to midrange for both cases, and I have 300gr loads for both cases, and they are not that far apart velocitywise simply because they don't need to be. A 300gr boolit at 1000 fps will go thru any car I shoot at.

Still if in the great outdoors I'll have the big one with me. In this case Bigger is Better!

My ear is still ringing!

Randy

[HarryT]

"...why not compare the .357 to the .44 Magnum?"

Because the the choice is between two handguns that Southern Shooter already has (.357/.44 Special).
I think he should carry both and let us know which is the better all round gun.

[Southern Shooter]

Thank you, HarryT. I am glad you pointed that out. :)

And, you may have a point there. Carry both and see how they feel.

Thanks

[gradyk]

I agree, carry both.

[Old Ironsights]

I'm sure it has already been said, but:

Both are great calibers...

but I can buy .38/.357 ammo (including shot shells) at most Rocky Mountain convenience/WalMart stores.

Not so with .44 sp...

[Bob Krack]

Every reply has been pretty close to being right. I am not able to say anything else except that if my personal safety at fairly short range were the primary criteria, the .44 special with a heavy boolit wins hands down.

Bob

[.357MAN]

looks like the 357 magnum fans are comparing loads found on the internet, which favor the 357 magnum by about 100-200 fb. of energy.

And the 44 special fans are speaking from experience, which sound like very hot CB 44 special loads, compared to CB 357 magnum loads. In the case of CB in the 357 magnum, it losses considerable headway, mostly do to the fact that CB cant take the high pressure ( in most situations ) so it needs to be downloaded. And CB in the 44 special can be pushed a lot further than factory loads.

But who is right? I understand both sides, but the question comes down to: what will the OP be shooting in his said guns? With factory jacketed loads the 357 magnum wins hands down for stopping power. But CB hand loads would favor the 44 special. So which is it? what is the OP going to be using?

One more thought: the OP said the 44 is ported, I have no clue what that does to velocity and CB. From what I hear, it's usually up to the particular pistol and the skill of the reloaded to make things work well.

[Old Ironsights]

My 190gr GB boolit raps out of my 2.5" SP101 at 1200fps...

[GH1]

Out of those two guns there has to be one you favor, if only ever so slightly. It may come down to grip size or shape, sight design, or it may have something to do with the holster. Maybe one rides with a little more comfort than the other. Maybe one is held a little more securely. There's probably one that you shoot a little more often, or have a little more skill with. Whichever gun that is, that's the one you need to carry, for in my opinion both will do the job.
GH1

[hamour]

A S&W Mod 27 or 28 in 6" BBL length, loaded with NOE or Mia's 180 gr Flat Nosed bullet on top of a heavy charge of slow powder (H-110 or 2400) will give you plenty of revolver power. If you need more, then get a rifle.

[1Shirt]

Smart folks go with what they can handle, and handle well, and are not afraid of what they are handling. Just my opinion!
1Shirt!:coffeecom

[GLL]

For me it all comes down to geography !
When I work in eastern Nevada, southern New Mexico, or western Texas a 4" Model 686 .357 is fine. When in Montana, Idaho, or Wyoming it is a 4" Model 624 .44Special (or a .44Magnum Mountain Gun)!

Jerry

[Bluehawk]

HI GUYS havn,t been on this forum for a couple of years but IM BACK >
TO me, in this debate , I have to go to the individual guns to make the decision . I believe that BOTH cartridges have a valid place in the original scenario. But the gun and what YOU want to do with it makes the decision .
If your going to small game hunt for survival I like both BUT the 44 has the advantage in the shot shells. more shot and better performance cause you can load bigger shot. IF your looking for a gun that IF your woken up startled in the middle of the night on the trail I want the gun to have the first two chambers loaded with shot capsules with buck shot in them so I can KNOW i'm hitting WHATEVER in the first instance to then pick my follow up shot later .
44 Has the advantage to that also . BUT MOST of the 44s are 5 shot in stead of 6 that is a disadvantage in some instances . MY NORMAL trail gun is a Rossi 3 in Stainless 44 spl 5 shot Its normal load is the Lee 215 SWC bullet loaded to about 1050 fps . Good defense and small game load. I HAVE also 240/250 grain SWC bullets on me for SERIOUS work IF NEEDED . I also have shot capsules loaded for the above mentioned task AND if snakes are in the area I have the first chamber loaded for that.
BUT lately I'M carrying my 4 3/4 Rodeo ( USAF ) in 45 colt does all better .

[Lonegun1894]

I prefer the .357, but the .44 Spl is a great gun too. Carry whichever you shoot better and are more comfortable with. Without knowing the exact reason for carrying it, threats involved, etc, I dont think one caliber has enough advantage over the other to make a difference. As has been said, for general woods bumming use, a .22 is hard to beat, but I would hate to have to defend myself with one against a grizzly, or take deer with it. But also wouldn't really want a .44 for squirrel either. I also have more .357s than anything else, so I am a bit biased. But to be fair, the only .44 Spl I ever had, I still kick myself for letting go when I was younger and dumber. May have only been a Charter Arms 5 shot, but it shot great. The only thing I have seen against the specific guns being asked about that I have an issue with is the .44 being ported, which is a feature I have learned to absolutely hate. But it does have a purpose and if the owner likes it, I see nothing against him using it.

[badgeredd]

If you were limited to one of these two specific calibers, both with 4 inch barrels, which would you choose as a trail/hiking gun in the Rocky Mountains region? Any particular reasons why?

(added after the original post: The .44 Special is a ported gun.)

Thanks

Since you mention your 44 is ported, I am assuming it is of fairly recent manufacture. Consequently, I'd give the nod to the 44 with uploaded hand-loads mainly because of the mass of the boolit you can shoot. I am also assuming you're talking personal protection...again critters 2 and 4 legged with a 240-250 grain boolit will react to the larger mass IMHO. I totally agree that one has to be proficient and comfortable with any gun and in all likelihood the best gun is the one you are MOST comfortable with. I haven't checked energy numbers for both cartridges, but I'd guess they're pretty close. Big boolit big hole gets my vote.

Edd

[Raygun]

I never had much use for a large caliber pistol or revolver in the woods. I've carried most any you can think of under .50 caliber. I have found the .22 lr and 38 special to be the most practical and useful. However, I don't roam the woods where large bear are a threat. If I did, a levergun would be my first choice. If you are looking for versatile, go with the 357 with various 38 and 357 loads which you know the point of impact, from your particular firearm.