A good article on 357 mag

[badguybuster]

I really enjoyed this one!

https://alaskagunsite.wordpress.com/...he-357-magnum/

[Buck Shot]

Interesting material, thanks for posting.

[bisleyfan41]

Good article. Thanks!

[Dale53]

Enjoyed this - Thanks for sharing!

Dale53

[cwtebay]

Great article!

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[megasupermagnum]

I don't like it. The author is talking as if it is settled science, when reality it's some goobledygook math made up of multiple peoples own made up formulas.

I love the 357 magnum, but that article is nothing but worthless text.

[Cosmic_Charlie]

I think the issue is with less than a perfect hit, how much more effective are the larger diameter calibers? Because in the real world, less than perfect hits are going to be the norm. I doubt many of us would choose a 3" .357 over a 4" 629 to strap on for an outing in brown bear country. But in a more realistic scenario, how many of us would choose a 3" .357 over a Glock 19 if we had business to attend to in East St. Louis? In my mind the .357 gets left on the table twice.

All that being said, my carry gun is a Model 60. But I don't live in griz country and I don't venture into urban war zones.

[Rick Hodges]

The guy seems pretty optimistic on his numbers for making his "mathematical" projected performance. 180gr. 357 mag at 1400 fps out of a 4" barrel? My guess is one would be hard pressed to see 1200 fps. from his 4" rig.

[JSnover]

Even the author admits shot placement is critical (I thought that was settled years ago) and cites examples to back up his argument. If a .357 or a .44 don't get it done it's not the bullet's fault.

[Buck Shot]

I suspect that in most cases, if a given shot (with a given shot placement) will do the trick with 44 Mag, it'll also do the trick with 357.

It's not like either one of them is particularly powerful compared to the average deer rifle.

Would I use either one of them on a brown bear? Not unless I was out of rocks to throw!

[JohnH]

I always find it odd that the 357 Mag is at once touted as a real man stopper out of a 4" at ~1300 fps barrel but it's next to worthless on deer out of a 20" barrel which gives it an extra ~450 fps, even though both animals for practical purposes weigh the same, have about the same bone weight, bone to body mass ratio. No one has ever said the black powder 44-40 loading was inadequate for deer and that 200 grain bullet at 1300 fps killed far more deer than the 30-30 is given credit for and Elmer's 44 Special load is for all practical purposes a ballistic twin of the 44-40. Yet somehow, the 357 from a rifle which will stand toe to toe with the 300 Black Out that we are told is the latest greatest AR platform hog and deer slayer is inadequate to the task.

[Daekar]

It's nice to see a bit of rationality about how much power is required to achieve good terminal performance. I'm not about to shoot Buffalo Bore in my S&W Model 60 for daily carry loads, I can't handle the recoil, but I would consider doing it for protecting against big critters when necessary and not feel undergunned.

357mag from a rifle is horribly underrated. The STARTING load of Lil'Gun with a 158gr RF out of my Henry is knocking on the door to 2000fps, and plenty accurate. Unless you have to make shots over 150 yards, you can rest assured that any deer sized target which gets away from you isn't the fault of the cartridge.

I actually have scope rings coming for that rifle so it can pull duty as a varmint rifle with 125gr boolits. If a critter is so far away that I can't hit it with one of those at 2000fps, then there's no hope for me to hit it with anything else either.

[rintinglen]

The guy seems pretty optimistic on his numbers for making his "mathematical" projected performance. 180gr. 357 mag at 1400 fps out of a 4" barrel? My guess is one would be hard pressed to see 1200 fps. from his 4" rig.

My opinion precisely.

Numbers are fun to play with, but I recall the old admonition, "figures lie and Liars figure." There are several assumptions made that are hogwash. Don't equate a bear with an inch or more of lard inside his thick, hairy hide, covering some solid muscles and thick bones with ballistic Jell-O. It simply doesn't match. Likewise, some of the numbers suggested are pretty speculative as far as velocity goes. My experience is that you would be pretty hard pressed to get 1200 fps with a 180 out of a 6" 357, save maybe a Redhawk overloaded to the gills. Not a load I'd care for in my Model 60, nor for that matter Model 66. And Marshall and Sanow's work can be accurately described as "at best, statistically flawed, at worst, pure invention." Then the argument shifts to placement over everything. I can't dispute that, but I can question the ability of most of us not named Miculek to assure consistent hits. Oh, but wait, he's a better shot who can assure his placement is perfect. Well, then I suppose one can argue that since Grizzlies have been taken with .22 LR's, that's all you need. Bologna, as Oscar Meyer would have it.

Now I don't say that I would feel utterly naked with a .357, but it would not have a 3 inch barrel. it would not be a small frame, and would not be my first choice. At the end of the day, there is no substitute for displacement, all else being equal.

I do fully concur with the 30-06 being ample for anything in North America that hasn't escaped from a zoo. A 180 grain bullet of modern design at 2700 Fps will put paid to just about anything that you shoot with it.

[megasupermagnum]

The guy seems pretty optimistic on his numbers for making his "mathematical" projected performance. 180gr. 357 mag at 1400 fps out of a 4" barrel? My guess is one would be hard pressed to see 1200 fps. from his 4" rig.

Not at all. Infact, you don't even need to hotrod it to get there. You don't even need to handload it. Buffalo Bore's 180gr cast round says it will do 1375 fps from a 4" barrel. That's real world tested, BB doesn't lie. There's lots of load data out there that does in the 1350 fps range. The old 45,000 CUP and European CIP stuff does even faster.

[rintinglen]

Neither Lyman No. 50 nor Speer # 13 lists any load that that will break 1225 fps with a 180 in either a 4 or 6 inch revolver. A 10 inch Contender will do it. And the 10 inch test barrel used by Hodgdon will do it. Alliant does list a max load of 2400 at 1300 from a 5.6" barrel. Western Lists a few loads that do so from a 6" barrel. Shooters World does not appear to list 180 grain .357 data. Vitavouri lists loads that break 1200, but from a 7 inch barrel. 1400 fps appears to be delusional, at least from factory pressure tested data.

Buffalo Bore's non-canister, secret loads may well be all that, but I have become very skeptical of velocity claims by manufacturers.

[robertbank]

The largest Grizzly on record was shot by a 5' lady with a single shot .22LR rifle. One shot in the ear did the bear in. That saud, I wiould not suggest to anyone the .22LR is adequate bear protection.

Interesting read ti be sure but beyond shot placement, the rest if the article is one guys opinion. Not sure the math that would appear to be constructed to prove his position, just saying.

U carry a GP-100 in .357Mag or the same model in 10MM. I just can't handle the .44mag from a weight or recoil point of view hence the other two calibers. Seems to me you have to carry what you can shoot well and bigger is always better IF you can shoot it well.

Take Care

Bob.

[sixshot]

Shot placement is #1, penetration is #2, if it has to be from a 357 magnum then so be it. Wouldn't be my first choice on big bears but hits count a lot more than misses last time I looked. Use the biggest gun you can handle.

Dick

[Murphy]

The Grand 357 Magnum.

Just my 2¢ worth of input. For my use, a 125 Grain JHP, a 150-158 Grain cast boolit, and a heavy Keith boolit out of a 4-6" barrel should handle all my needs at normal velocities for those weights. If it won't handle the task at hand? I need more gun, not hotter loads.

Math is an awesome thing. Also, I totally suck at math. That being said, over the decades I've read so many different stopping power charts based on math I quit bothering with them.

Murphy

[gwpercle]

Not enough load data listed ... you going to write about the 357 Magnum ... show me some loads !
Gary

[Tar Heel]

The calculations indicated in the article are incorrect. My math doesn't jive with his math. Also if you average something to death or come up with a quotient that pushes everything into the same group, one could then state that "mathematically" a 22LR has the same "stopping power" of a .30-06 cartridge.

While I do not doubt the veracity and effectiveness of a well placed shot as alluded to, that (of course) was not in the calculation for PEN or the other arbitrary terms. To "prove" that a 180gr .357 bullet has the same penetration and therefore the same effectiveness as a 240gr 44 caliber bullet is a proof ad nauseum and a "reduction to zero."

His indicated answer for the 357 bullet was calculated with a .400 caliber instead of with a more "correct" .350 caliber. When .350 is substituted in his specified formula, the end result is lower than the stated result. Regardless, the "mathematical proof" is simply an argument to average. His target velocity is also the muzzle velocity. Another computational error intended to equalize the results.

As always, shot placement is the most critical variable in a lethal encounter with a critter intent on doing you harm. A .30-06 bullet through the haunch would only serve to aggravate an already aggravated bear. A 357 slug or a 44 slug through the brain pan or the spine will accomplish the desired result.

Granted - some horsepower is requisite and I do not doubt a .357 is capable; but his formula however which "proves" this point is in doubt.
I would think a hard cast & heavy .357 bullet at the highest allowable velocity would get the job done. The closer the shot, the more effective the terminal ballistics.

Would I use a .357 Mag? Probably not. My intuition would have me wearing a 44 Mag with a heavy SSK bullet.