What's a better deer rifle? .357 Magnum or 45 Long Colt?
What bullet would you recommend?
Thanks
Printable View
What's a better deer rifle? .357 Magnum or 45 Long Colt?
What bullet would you recommend?
Thanks
If it's a gun that can take warm .45 Colt loads then it's the .45 for sure, neither is my first choice for deer.
They are both Rossi rifles.Quote:
Originally Posted by MT Chambers
Whichever the shooter is most accurate and has confidence with. I’d personally choose 45 Colt.
Distance dependant with 357. Run with a 170+ in the 357 and your good. As above, shot placement trumps alot. The 45 can be pushed pretty hard in an 1892 action but if ya can't hit the barn door...
I consider both brush guns and i'm only confident with the irons to about 80 yards.
Either of the two would be great. I chose .45 Colt, but if range extends beyond 100 to about 150 yards .357 would be better. The Rossi .357 is greatly underestimated by those who haven't loaded for one. It will do just about anything a .30-30 will do, with the same bullet weights.
I've taken over fifty deer with the .357mag with just the handgun alone. Another nine or ten with a Marlin lever gun and a Low Wall. I have yet to lose even one deer with the .357mag and only lost one with the handgun and that was with a full power 44mag load.....just made a bad shot. It's all about shot placement, not power. FWIW, my longest shot with the .357mag was 167 yards (not recommended, too much velocity loss and virtually no expansion). Either would be equally effective if the bullet is put in the vitals. I prefer the .357mag simply because I own several guns in that caliber and they shoot fantastic. It's just my favorite handgun cartridge.
Sorry but have to disagree. The .357 and the .45LC are both adequate deer cartridges, but when you look at the energy retention of the. 357 at 100 yards, I wouldn't consider a .357 beyond 100yards for deer. For the same reason I wouldn't try to drive a fence post with a 6 oz ball peen hammer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tracy
A 287 gr Ranch Dog still retains over 1000 ft lbs at 150 yards. So I think the .45LC the better choice.
EXPERIENCE will show that it's where the bullet hits that kills. Neither cartridge is a long range cartridge....or shouldn't be. If you're making a choice on which to use, look at how well the gun shoots, how well you can shoot the gun, and don't count on energy to get the job where poor marksmanship is a possibility, or the shots to far for the gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshotshoey
I agree with NSB on both his posts.
That being said I voted .45 for one reason. All else being equal, larger bore = larger bullet = bigger hole and more likely to go straight through both sides.
Bullet placement is king, bullet size is prince.
Great advice bullet placement first. Both will cleanly take deer but I would prefer the 45 colt as it can be loaded pretty good in a lever action other than the original or replicas. That said wider meplat and heavier boolits can make up for a shot slightly off its mark in that penetration is king.
Really? When did this become an accuracy issue? Both are inherently accurate. OF COURSE shot placement is primary. No matter WHAT cartridges you are using. That is fact. All I am saying is the 45LC is better in a cross wind and at ranges of 100 to 150 yards. And I wouldn't consider either one of these a heavy kicker (recoil). But someone else might.Quote:
Originally Posted by NSB
I've been doing this for 45 years. There is no need to talk to me about experience. And my experience tells me limit the .357 to 100 yards, and the 45 LC to 150 yards. The chances of wounding go up substantially beyond these parameters.
Regrettably, marksmanship is sorely lacking in general...so touting shot placement is moot. A lot of folks think they are good shots until they need to prove it.
My opinion WRT pistol calibers, is that most "hunters" (as opposed to shooters) are best served with a large bullet that expands and will still go through a deer. Practice shooting from field positions. Your effective range is that distance at which you can hit a 6" target every shot. Most people will shoot far worse in the field under stress and groups will be twice the size...so a hit in the 12" kill area of a deer is highly likely at "their" effective range. (The effective range of the caliber will generally be longer)
For a shooter, (aka marksman) caliber is less important and effective range is greater.
To answer the question, in my environment, I would select the .357 for its higher velocity as it is more forgiving of errors in range estimation. If I was shooting from a blind or stand, where range will be short, I would go with the .45LC.
I have no need to use a pistol caliber (straight wall cartridge restriction) or to prove my marksmanship abilities (plenty of trinkets already). So it makes no sense to use a pistol caliber lever action to hunt deer. A .308 is not necessary but what I use. Lever action pistol caliber rifles are my fun guns and HAR's (Hillbilly Assault Rifles) if/when AR's are banned.
.45 LC - punches a bigger hole.
which ever one you have, the old adage is, that beware the owner of one gun he will definitely know how to use it. This would apply, learn the limits and stay within them you'll do fine. The only thoughts relative are buy the firearm that best fits the occasion, meaning if your going to shoot across a 200yard beanfield neither of the two are going to cut the mustard, however if its dense growth where you hunt and shots will be rarely 50-100 yards they will work. Marksmanship also scores high here as well.
I use a marlin 1894 in 45 and use the RCBS 45-270 saa. Used it the first time last year with very good results.
I get more Ring and Movement from my 8" steel plate at 80yrds with the 45 colt than the 357 mag :popcorn: but I use my 30/30 for Deer:coffee:
But feel both would work within their limitations but I would use the 45. with 250gr to 80yrds JMHO.
I've dropped plenty of deer with a 357 Mag and that would be my personal preference. Both would make excellent brush guns.
Here is a good read on this topic, http://www.leverguns.com/articles/pa...ltlevergun.htm
I have both, and both do a good job as a brush gun. I feel that the 45 lc has a little edge over all.
Are we shooting little W.V. Whitetails or big North woods Whitetails ? Little Blacktail deer or big Mule Deer ? .357 is not even in the conversation for big deer in my selection of a 'Deer Rifle'.
I have used both for decades. Handguns and rifles. I like the 45 Colt & feel 150 is a very long distance for either one!
CW
I just found out my old 92in 44-40 that I killed many deer with as a youth should not have done as well as it did. Never lost one longest one went was 43 paces. But we were taught to not shoot unless we had a good shot.
Personally, I'd look not at the result on deer, as both have been used enough to verify both are effective, but rather I'd ask a series of peripheral questions.
Will it be a reloading only gun? 357 is much cheaper to buy than 45 colt. Is money an issue? 38/357 is cheaper to reload for. Is there any known issues with the gun in either chambering? Are you set to load for either caliber already? Do you just want one caliber over the other?
I use a ruger 77/357 for deer from 40-75 yards. Within that I use a Blackhawk. My load is a jacketed soft point of 158gr, or a rnfp cast boolit of the same weight. Both with a stiff charge of h110/296.
I've shot deer with both and they both worked. That being said of the two I prefer the 45 Colt for deer.
If there is the possibility of having to use factory ammo, I would go with the .357. Most .45 Colt ammo is sedate cowboy type stuff. Not to say it couldn't work, but you would be negating much of the advantage of the larger cartridge. Of course, you can also use cheap and plentiful .38 Special for practice and small game in the .357.
If you do your part, it won't matter which one to 100 yards. Never had either stay in a deer NOE 360-180 or the NOE 454-280 both WFN and neither a hot load.
I've taken deer with both using a handgun and both work well within a reasonable distance. If I owned both I'd go with the 45LC. As I have Blackhawks in both calibers and I like to carry a pistol with a rifle when hunting that wouldn't really factor in unless I was worried about bear
How big? I took a 175lb whitetail with one shot using a 357Mag pistol at 35yrds. Broke the shoulder and penetrated both lungs. 200lb plus I'd be very, very careful with shot selection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bohannon
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostHawk
Yep, this ^^^^^. 100%
Putting up comparisons like this always lack one crucial proponent. What loads are you looking to use? Are we talking SAMMI 357 magnum vs SAMMI 45 colt? If so it's not even a competition, the 357 magnum has the 45 colt beat and then some. Standard pressure 45 colt, with a 200 grain bullet, you would be looking at 1100-1200 fps or so in a rifle. With a 357 magnum you would be able to push into 1400-1500 fps, maybe even a tiny bit more. The 45 colt does have a diameter advantage, but I'm not convinced that directly translates to bigger holes without other compromises.
Of course if we are talking about "45 colt" loaded to 30,000+ PSI, then all bets are off.
45 Colt will garner less blood shot tissue. Can't say the same about the 357. Keep in mind with such cartridges the hunter must know his shooting limits. Not knowing such limits he'd best prepare to carry a compass a roll of florescent tape and a flashlight with fresh battery's.
In this instance as far as my deer close range lever preference? 32 Special.
I'm not a fan of kinetic energy as an indicator of killing power. Let's look at some numbers for the .357. Buffalo Bore sells a load consisting of a 180 grain flat nose, gas checked bullet with a bc of .21 and muzzle velocity of 1851 fps from a Marlin with 18.5" barrel. Here it is: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.ph...t_detail&p=100Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshotshoey
I ran the numbers with an online ballistic calculator. The numbers agree with BB's published numbers. I just wanted more information with smaller steps. So here it is: http://www.shooterscalculator.com/ba...php?t=52584be6
With a starting velocity of 1851 fps, it is still doing 1388 fps at 150 yards. I also noticed that with a 150 yard zero, the point of impact is within 3.15" from the muzzle to 175 yards, with 5 yard steps. At that range it is still doing 1324 fps. A 180 grain bullet at 1300+ fps will definitely kill a deer just fine.
I used that load as an example because the actual specs are published, but there are several 170+ grain cast bullets that can provide similar results.
Here's another good one, also by Paco: http://www.leverguns.com/articles/pa...literature.htmQuote:
Originally Posted by sac
my personal take would be the 45 colt
long history,bigger hole whats not to like
45 colt baby!
The 357mg is on the minimum end of deer cartridges no matter how you slice it. I have killed deer only with 357 and 45 revolvers. Never shot one with rifle in these calibers. All under 60 yds. I could have killed them with a 22 but that doesn't make a 22 a deer gun. Out of the two the 45 has the advantage. I have shot most of my handgun deer with a 44mg at same distances. I haven't killed a deer with 44 carbine either. I have a 1894 Marlin 44 but don't carry it for deer. If I'm going to carry a long gun I want the advantage of rifle calibers.
We can discuss this all day long, but basically you should use what suits you. I personally have witnessed a deer being taken with a simple, single shot, bolt action, 22. One shot, and the deer dropped.Quote:
Originally Posted by NSB
Not a fan of kinetic energy? Then what does the higher velocity give you? When you double the velocity of a mass, the energy increases 4 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tracy
Ok... now be fair. You have chosen high end .357 ammo to make your point. Do the same with high end Buffalo Bore .45 colt +P Deer Granades. Or some of the other offerings they have. Like the BUFFALO-BARNES LEAD-FREE .45 Colt +P Pistol and Handgun Ammo.
well, since i can't have the 44 mag, i'll go with the 45 colt.
big holes lets the blood gushes out while the air goes in.
not a fan of kinetic energy- read my signature