lets talk 44 mag vs .357??

Under 100 yards a .357 is equal to a .30-30. Over 100 yards and you're better off with an actual rifle cartridge like a .30-30, .35 rem or .45-70. In other words, if ya want a pistol caliber carbine a .357 will do anything that a .44 will do unless big bears, moose, etc is on the menu. If big bears, moose etc on the menu you need more than a pistol caliber carbine anyway.

.357 all the way.

CB
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunThe 357 is a pea shooter.

I'd rather a 45 Colt than either.........

I can't help it Ken.

"A caliber must begin with a 4 to be effective in combat"
"Good thinking, because the .357 magnum is for pu$%ies"

Sorry bro, it just popped in my head
laugh.gif



Chupa
 
I shot a deer that was quartering toward myself @ 25yds squarely on the point of the shoulder, with a S&W 357. A shot I considered to be a perfectly good kill shot @ the time. Afterall, I'd killed MANY a deer in my life.

Well, it turned out to be the longest tracking job of my whitetail hunting career. ONLY tracking job ever needed on a deer not shot with an arrow.

My conclusion was/is: If I had my 45 Colt or 480 Ruger, that deer would have died much quicker with no tracking job through a thick azz cedar swamp required. Same shot, DRT. I have no doubts that the right person can kill deer consistently with a 357. I just don't always like having to be that selective.

In my eyes, the 357 is an excellent round, but a "tweener round". For me, it is too big for small game, and too small for big game. Others love it........
 
I had a nice Marlin 44 Mag rifle to complement my .44 Mag handgun. It was a fine shooter but not practical for deer or antelope in the open country of South Dakota. I found it a good home. I tend to agree with 2muchgun that the 357 is marginal for big game from a handgun and barely adequate for a carbine round.

Shot placement gets more critical with the .357 Magnum and I would not guarantee short tracking of deer size game. I believe the .44 Magnum to be OK if the range is not stretched beyond 150 yards for the carbine and 100 yards for the scoped handgun. I have reliably taken many deer with both handgun and carbines in .44 Mag within those limitations. I doubt I could say the same for the .357 if I had gone to that option. I'm not saying it could not be done but I personally would not count on it.
 
If the 357 magnum put down every kind of big game back in the day including Brown Bear and the bullets, brass, primers, powder and technology has advanced so why would it not be a good choice today? You always see this everytime a bigger bore comes out. I killed lots of deer wiith just a Ruger Security Six with a 4" barrel and required no tracking on any...close shots and a good hit. I'm really not a 357 magnum Guru or anything but it is enough power to bring down big game if the distance is close and yes there are bigger caliber out there and I like the 460 Smith and Wesson...Smiling. Both calibers are good chices.
 
All I can tell is that if you pack a 357 into brown bear country for hunting/protection, do yourself a favor and file down the front sight so you don't chip a tooth while you are putting it into the back of your mouth to put yourself out of your misery.......
 
I bought a H&R 357 back in 1993 for my boy to start on and it shoots 357 Max, Mag and 38's. Now my 9 year old grand daughter shot her first doe with it last fall. So far the gun has kild 10 or more deer up to 100 yards. The 158 gr hollow points expanded all it's energy within the deer and they never went very far. The 357 max wouldn't hold a group as well as the 357 mag, so that is what we used most of the time and they were cheaper.
 
I think the .357 was invented for defense, meaning people. The .44 was for both. Not many enforcement groups carry a .44.
I have never heard of a 600 yard kill with a .357.
Most animals can and have been killed with a .22.
For game animals deer or hogs and above I easily choose the .44.
 
I have shot a few of both,hunted and killed deer with both.

Either weapon requires a consistant hold and finger placement,,,the 357 is a bit more user friendly, about this than the 44 mag.

I am no T/C fan at all,,but i have one in 44 mag that ,with the right load,210 grainers,its a good medium range killer..

I had a super redhawk that didnt like me one bit,,musta been blessed by a Peta witch or something ,,so down the road it went.

The most accurate,effective deer killer i own is a SMITH 686 distiguished combat magnum,,,gave 300 for it in 1989.

X
 
You might try some Garret bullets in your 357 mag but only a few brands can withstand them and yes there are better calibers for bear...everytime a bigger caliber comes out the caliber that was brown bear medicine for years is just marginal at best by todays standards and that is just funny.
 
Anytime you are hunting a critter that can rip your head off and poop down your neck with one swing of a paw, too large of a caliber does not exist IMO.......
 
No bears where I live. We have an agreement, they stay west and north and leave Joshua all to me. If they cross the city limit sign....they better beware. Cuz I'm packing the Gamo!!!!!


Chupa
 
Imagine the horror when you realize that your last line of defense in a bear attack is to crap your pants in order to make yourself taste bad..........
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Chupathingy No bears where I live. We have an agreement, they stay west and north and leave Joshua all to me. If they cross the city limit sign....they better beware. Cuz I'm packing the Gamo!!!!!


Chupa You be careful with that thing, you could put an eye out.
 
Originally Posted By: RubenatorOriginally Posted By: Chupathingy No bears where I live. We have an agreement, they stay west and north and leave Joshua all to me. If they cross the city limit sign....they better beware. Cuz I'm packing the Gamo!!!!!


Chupa You be careful with that thing, you could put an eye out.


sFun_tonguestuck.gif
That is still a funny movie, I don't care how old you get.


Chupa
 
Back
Top