.357 Magnum Hunting... Being Laughed At :(

[oic0]

For some reason whenever I mention I got a hunting gun and people ask me "what is it?" and I say ".357 magnum carbine" their instant reply is "Thats too weak to hunt, get a real rifle". I'm not scared of recoil or big guns, in fact I am usually the dummy who jumps in over his head. I just thought it would be nice to have one gun I can hunt big or small game with AND be able to afford ammunition to shoot as much as I want (ammo price played a huge role in the decision). Lastly, I don't know... something just made me fall in love with the idea of a tube fed lever action.

I figured I would get some input from you guys.

Here is the info I have gathered so far with google searches.

Max Range: ~125 yards
Ideal Weight: 158-180grain
Ideal Bullet: Cast core.

Is there anything else I should know? did I really make a mistake? (I have moderate experience shooting... tons of plinking, occasional hunting for small game, never had the patience to sit in a tree).

Also, for small game I think I am going to try a 158g SWC .38 special round. Don't want to blow rabbits to bits but if what I read online is correct it should punch a nice hole right through them breaking bones as it goes.

[Hobie]

For some reason whenever I mention I got a hunting gun and people ask me "what is it?" and I say ".357 magnum carbine" their instant reply is "Thats too weak to hunt, get a real rifle". I'm not scared of recoil or big guns, in fact I am usually the dummy who jumps in over his head. I just thought it would be nice to have one gun I can hunt big or small game with AND be able to afford ammunition to shoot as much as I want (ammo price played a huge role in the decision). Lastly, I don't know... something just made me fall in love with the idea of a tube fed lever action.

I figured I would get some input from you guys.

Here is the info I have gathered so far with google searches.

Max Range: ~125 yards
Ideal Weight: 158-180grain
Ideal Bullet: Cast core.

Is there anything else I should know? did I really make a mistake? (I have moderate experience shooting... tons of plinking, occasional hunting for small game, never had the patience to sit in a tree).

Also, for small game I think I am going to try a 158g SWC .38 special round. Don't want to blow rabbits to bits but if what I read online is correct it should punch a nice hole right through them breaking bones as it goes.

That will work. Too little is devoted to PLACEMENT and too much to power.

[TedH]

You won't find many around here that will laugh at you. The 357 in a levergun with a good 158-180 gr. bullet is a great combo for the short range deer woods. Many of us use it with complete satisfaction.

[86er]

I think it is a great choice to fit the criteria you've established. I've had a recent client bring one to South Africa and shoot impala and warthog with it. We've had decent success from other forumites that have hunted with me, most notably OI's deer (and those he shot on his own recently) and Ji's blackbuck. Personally, I like to limit the 357 rifle to 80 yds max and 200 lbs or less animals - but that is sure to differ with other's opinions. My observations are that the 158 gr controlled expansion loads, like the Federal Hydra-Shok, Federal Fusion and other premium brands/bullets are as effective as the 180 gr hardcast loads. I know you're keeping ammo cost in mind but the Grizzly Extreme is a devastating 357 round that expands to 1 1/8 " diameter with with cutting petals and 10-12" of penetration. For personal protection and deer and antelope that is probably the best performance you can get out of the 357 mag. For small game, plinking and target shooting any factory 38 spl or 357 will do if applied appropriately. Good luck with it!

[.45colt]

Very few people have seen what happens when pistol rounds are shot in rifles. most of the members here know the real story and the posts of successful hunt's are more than proof. when the .357 mag first came out if I remember right the owner of Smith&Wesson killed just about everything in north America with it.from a revolver. Don't worry You have enough gun.

[DBW]

I'm not a hunter, but if the .357 will take out the most dangerous creature on this ball of mud it should work on most of the fury critters roaming the range.

[gamekeeper]

People who laugh at another's choice of firearm are extremely rude and in this case, bloody ignorant too.

[76/444]

Just laugh back at them,.... they don't know what they are talking about. I can't think of anything I would do with my 44 lever, that you couldn't do with your 357.

Or, just ignore them.

[Modoc ED]

Don't worry about what others think. Back when, Dan Wesson killed practically every meaningful head of game in this country and abroad. He did it with the .357 Magnum using a revolver. Now some people scoff at using the .357 for anything. They say it isn't powerful enough. Their problem is that they base their knowledge on what they have read not what they have experienced in the field.

For what you've described, you'll do just fine with the .357 Magnum and .38 Special.

[rjohns94]

you have chosen well enjoy. I love my .357 levergun and use it for deer and small game.

[gglass]

Wow! I'm not sure that I would hang around with people who are (as described above) both rude and ignorant.

I live in Indiana and as such, we can only use non-shotgun firearms that are chambered in pistol calibers. I use both of my Rossi M92 Pumas chambered in .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum. If either of these leverguns does not bring down a deer, it is my fault and not the rifle. I've seen deer run away, never to be seen again after being hit with a 30-30 and even a 30-06. I've also seen deer fall within 10 feet after being hit by a .357 Magnum. The only difference in all these is shot placement.

My two 1892 Pumas:


I won't even mention the effect of a .357 Magnum hollow point on a feral cat.

[deerwhacker444]

I won't laugh at you, it works.!

180gr. XTP went in thru ribs, exited out thru neck and kept going..

[cnjarvis]

I have the hots for one of those myself - one of Steve's worked-over 92's in that exact caliber for similar reasons.

Good choice and happy hunting friend.

[nemhed]

Do either of these faces look like a 357mag isn't good enough? Does anyone seriously believe that a 357 mag is less lethal or has less killing power than a broadhead tipped arrow (and yes I know broadheads kill differently than bullets). If I could only have one rifle it would be my 357 Marlin. If I could only have two rifles one would be a 22lr the other would be my 357 Marlin. BTW I also use the 180 gr Hornady XTP.

[gglass]

If the above pics and stories don't convince your friends, then they might be persuaded by a nerdy chart.

This chart show the average muzzle velocity and muzzle energy of the original Winchester 1892 calibers (except the 218 Bee) and the modern calibers. It looks to me that the .357 Magnum holds it's own compared to the venerable cowboy cartridges that have brought down millions of deer.

[Nath]

Good for you friend, nowt wrong with a 357.

The jokes on them really ain't it

Nath.

[Tycer]

Take the time to learn where your gun shoots with the ammo you are going to hunt with. DO NOT sight your gun in on the bench!!!! My Win 94 shoots 2"+ to the left off sandbags vs hand held at 100 yards.

I've taken 225# deer with the .357. I've never recovered a bullet from a deer, they pass right through on a broadside shot.

Proper shot placement with ALL calibers is mandatory IMHO!

[awp101]

Some advice from someone who's been laughed at for years: If it works, don't sweat what the gunstore commandos think.

[horsesoldier03]

All of my centerfire hunting rifles are leverguns. 2- 30-30 and 1- .44 mag. the other is a .50 Lyman GPR. I sure wish I could find a good deal on a .357 to join them. Some folks seem to think you have to have the 7mm or 300 mag so you can reach out on a far shot. IMO, thats not hunting thats shooting! I prefer to keep my shots around 100 yrds 50 yards is even better. It takes alot of effort to get within 50 yrds of a mature buck!

[scarville]

That will work. Too little is devoted to PLACEMENT and too much to power.

+1

Anyone telling you a .357 carbine is too small for hunting probably learned the art from playing video games.

[Nath]

Horsesoldier has it, I love chuking the 308w at crows n' other stuff at 200yds plus but nowt gets me all excited as sneaking up on something with my bow under 20yds!

30/30 is efficient but 357 more so IMO.

Nath.

[Buck Elliott]

Yup --- What counts is HITS in the right place. Everything else is purely academic. The "hot stove league" doesn't matter at all.

Doug Wesson killed the biggest and the baddest in the Western hemisphere with a .357 Magnum revolver, so don't give it another thought.

OTOH, I still prefer "bigger & heavier" when the toothed & fanged & clawed neighbors might just show up unexpectedly...

[pdawg.shooter]

Heck, around here (western Kansas) every one says the 30-30 is not enough gun for deer. Guess they have gotten bullet proof over the years. Any one willing to guess how many deer have fell to the 30-30?

[gglass]

That will work. Too little is devoted to PLACEMENT and too much to power.

+1

Anyone telling you a .357 carbine is too small for hunting probably learned the art from playing video games.

+1

Truer words...

[O.S.O.K.]

Well, I hardly need to add my +1 but I will.

The next time anybody laughs at the .357 Mag carbine ask them if they've ever hunted with one? Then tell them after they say "no" that you're not surprised as its more of an expert's cartridge.

Those castcore loads will put a hole completely through the deer from any reasonable angle - plenty to do the job.

[Jason_W]

I don't think any deer hit at 100 yards or less with a .357 158-180 grain bullet would know the difference between in and a 30-30.

[deerwhacker444]

I don't think any deer hit at 100 yards or less with a .357 158-180 grain bullet would know the difference between in and a 30-30.

Look at Jason_W's results from his bullet testing.

Bullet Testing

[Old Ironsights]

Print these pictures.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/M ... G_0534.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/M ... G_0535.jpg


When they laugh about the .357, tell them that the damage they see was caused at 110yds by a 180gr cast bullet (Buffalo Bore) moving at 1800fps out of a 20" .357 Levergun.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/M ... 71429a.jpg

Boom-flop. Ain't nothin weak/underperforming about a .357 when kept to its optimum ranges (<125yds)

[tman]

the .357 in a rifle might be the best usefull cartridge you can get . from small game, using .38 specials 148 wadcutters. to 180 full load hardcasts, you can take all north american game. the big stuff is a close range propostion only. as a defensive cartridge it's one of the best, if not the best manstoppers going. it may be the least expensive centerfire to shoot, therefore plenty of practice to increase your marksmanship. was out deerhunting yesterday and ran across a HUGE BLACK BEAR. next time i'm hiking those mountains in the spring, you can bet i'll have the .357 in my belt. i think you made a wise choice. those who laughed at you are dam fools.

[DBW]

Time for a .357 fan group hug.

[Pete44ru]

You've made a BIG mistake ! ! !

For those dastardly wabbits, a .460 Weatherby Magnum would be about minimum !



.

[Swampman]

"The .357 Magnum cartridge (and S&W gun) was an instant runaway success. S&W had originally conceived a very limited demand, with individual registered revolvers being individually built to individual customer's specifications. That lasted for only about two years. Not only did every cop in the nation want one, but Major Wesson also made the new revolver a sportsman's choice by setting out on a highly publicized hunting trip to take nearly every major species of big game in North America with an eight-inch version of the new revolver. And he did it. For the next 20 years, until Elmer Keith's heavy-loaded .44 Specials became the second ammo recipe to be poured from a magnum bottle, the .357 was the cartridge that every serious handgun shooter had to have. Even today, nearly three generations later, the .357 Magnum remains second to none in popularity for general-purpose sport, hunting, and law enforcement/personal-defense use in a revolver."

In a carbine it's a lot more cartridge.

[86er]

Many, many moons ago I shot a black bear with a 4" 357 Mag. I don't know the bullet or weight but it was SuperVel ammo. The first shot made the little bugger a little mad and the next 5 shots were taken between 25 feet and point blank. The 357 did its job when I made the shots count.

[awp101]

The next time anybody laughs at the .357 Mag carbine ask them if they've ever hunted with one? Then tell them after they say "no" that you're not surprised as its more of an expert's cartridge.

I have GOT to remember that one...

[Birdman]

After all these posts all I have to say is "yep".

[AJMD429]

A .357 Mag with the right bullet and shot placement will work fine. Some prefer other cartridges, and that's fine, but if your critics really NEED a 'more powerful' cartridge, then maybe they need to work some more on shot placement or use decent bullets...

[pokey]

hah!

[LeverBob]

Two words....Skeeter Skelton

Two words...Andy Law

Two words...Doug Wesson

Two words...Col. Charles Askins

Too many to list...

LB

[PaulB]

Laugh back at the guys hauling around big, clunky 7 Mags and .300 Mags for killing whitetails.

[L_Kilkenny]

Having first hand experience of what a .357 in a 4" revolver will do to a deer I can only imagine what it's capable of out of a rifle/carbine. IMO, the .357's wound channel is far more damaging than a 12ga foster slug. The 12ga. punches a hole (albeit a big one) but leaves much of the surrounding meat in good condition. The .357 on the other hand scramble's the insides and has an impressive wound channel. Hot loaded 180gr. XTP's just plain tear "stuff" up!

LK

[COSteve]

Deleted

[piller]

That post from 86er looks so old that he probably wasn't even shaving yet. The animals back then hadn't evolved the bullet proof skin that they have today. By the way, does anyone know which handgun was the most powerful up until the .357 Magnum was made? Ask the Texas Rangers about the gun they had Sam Colt make to their design when a Ranger named Walker was sent to Colt's factory with a list of design changes.

[gglass]

gglas's comparison chart above, uses rifle data for the older calibers while it uses pistol data for the newer calibers. This makes his chart pretty meaningless when comparing calibers in a carbine.

Here it is modified with rifle data for the 38spl+P and 357mag from my chrono data in my 20" 357 Rossi carbine. My version shows an apples to apples comparison from a rifle of the old rounds with both the 38spl+P and 357mag. I don't have any rifle data for the 44 spl and 44mag to correct those listing. I can say that it shows pistol data again which grossly understates both the 44 spl and 44mag performance when used in a rifle.

It shows that the .357mag in a carbine has better performance than a 25-20, 32-20, 38-40, or 44-40. As the 44-40 was specifically developed for the Win '92 and performs very well as a deer rifle, you can tell those who laugh that they simply don't know of what they speak.

Steve,

Thanks for the fix on the data. I wish that I had more control over the data, but the chart was pulled from ammoguide.com, which only allows for cartridge averages. The barrel lengths are not shown, and I agree that it does grossly skew some of the numbers. The reason for posting the chart was to reinforce the same conclusion that you arrived at... Namely, the .357 Magnum is nothing to sneeze at.

http://ammoguide.com/cgi-bin/bcompare.cgi

[gglass]

I was able to run a filter on the ammunition data points and pulled just 20" barrel ballistics for the modern cartridges. None of the .357 Magnum data points had quite the numbers that you were able to chrono, but the chart is now more representative of real-world 1892 rifle ballistics. (You load some really HOT .357 Mags!)

[El Chivo]

I may start hunting with .357; the Barnes bullets for it will expand at any range I can hit with it, whereas the 30-30 and 35 Rem bullets won't. And the rifle is a pound lighter.

How's IMR 4227 for a hunting-load powder?

[Old Ironsights]

I was able to run a filter on the ammunition data points and pulled just 20" barrel ballistics for the modern cartridges. None of the .357 Magnum data points had quite the numbers that you were able to chrono, but the chart is now more representative of real-world 1892 rifle ballistics. (You load some really HOT .357 Mags!)...

Not really. Look at the Buffalo Bore data. It's all within SAAMI spec, yet the 180 WFN clocks at 1800+ from a rifle and I chrony'd it at 1200 from my 2.5" SP101...

[jmiller]

I've shot over 40 deer with a .357 handgun and haven't lost one yet. I've shot five with a Marlin I bought two years ago also. Shot placement is critical with any caliber. It is more than enough gun for deer sized game. I get almost no pass throughs with 140-145 grain bullets and almost all pass throughs with 180 grain bullets. All do a very good. Just ignore the detractors. They read too many magazines and don't know what they're talking about.

[COSteve]

I was able to run a filter on the ammunition data points and pulled just 20" barrel ballistics for the modern cartridges. None of the .357 Magnum data points had quite the numbers that you were able to chrono, but the chart is now more representative of real-world 1892 rifle ballistics. (You load some really HOT .357 Mags!)

Actually, I don't. My load for the 357mag round tested consists of the following components; a Zero 158grn JSP bullet, Win once fired case, CCI SPM primer, and 16.5grns H110 loaded at an OAL of 1.580". Hodgdon lists 16.7grns as a max load of H110 for the 158grn XTP bullet so my load isn't even a max charge.

Also, please note that my 38sl # are for a +P, your 357mag is a 180grn bullet, and my 357mag are for a 158grn bullet. As far as your numbers being lower than mine, 1,822fps out of a carbine isn't fast at all as Hobie posted in another thread that he's seen 158grn 357mag velocities in a carbine over 2,000fps (1,403lb/ft ME) and others have claimed over 2,100fps (1,547lb/ft ME).

However, performance at the muzzle is one thing but it seems to me that velocity and muzzle energy at say, 100yds would be a better comparison for field use. Therefore, I used Handloads.coms ballistic calculator with both your and my data and generated the following information.

Caliber ...... Grns ...... MV ...... ME ... 100yd MV . 100yd ME
25-20 ......... 79 ....... 1645 .... 475 ..... 1252 ........ 275
32-20 ........ 107 ....... 1860 .... 822 ..... 1378 ........ 451
38-40 ........ 168 ....... 1574 .... 924 ..... 1165 ........ 506
44-40 ........ 205 ....... 1375 .... 861 ..... 1078 ........ 529
38sl+P *...... 158 ....... 1421 .... 708 ..... 1122 ........ 422
38sl **........ 158 ....... 1300 .... 675 ..... 1079 ........ 465
357mag * ... 158 ....... 1822 ... 1165 ..... 1397 ........ 685
357mag **... 180 ....... 1574 ..... 990 ..... 1254 ........ 629

Hypothetical 357mag 2000fps and 2100fps performance.
357mag ..... 158 ....... 2000 ... 1403 ..... 1538 ........ 830
357mag ..... 158 ....... 2100 ... 1547 ..... 1621 ........ 922

This data clearly shows that the both the 158grn and 180grn .357mag loads deliver significantly more energy on target at 100yds than any of the other calibers listed. Also, if one believes that a 2000fps or 2100fps 158grn round is possible, the energy on target for the 357mag runs in the neighborhood of 60% higher than any other caliber listed.

But, energy on target is no use at all if you don't hit what you're aiming at so let's also compare trajectory information for 50yds, 100yds, and 150yds assuming a 100yd zero to see which is the flatter shooting round.

Caliber ...... Grns ...... MV ..... 50yd ... 100yd . 150yd
25-20 ......... 79 ....... 1645 ... 1.90" ...... 0" .. -10.39"
32-20 ........ 107 ....... 1860 ... 1.50" ...... 0" .... -6.26"
38-40 ........ 168 ....... 1574 ... 2.18" ...... 0" .... -8.60"
44-40 ........ 205 ....... 1375 ... 2.78" ...... 0" .. -10.28"
38sl+P *...... 158 ....... 1421 ... 2.54" ...... 0" .... -9.45"
38sl **........ 158 ....... 1300 ... 3.01" ...... 0" .. -10.79"
357mag * ... 158 ....... 1822 ... 1.47" ...... 0" .... -5.96"
357mag **... 180 ....... 1574 ... 2.92" ...... 0" .. -10.39"

Hypothetical 357mag 2000fps and 2100fps performance.
357mag ..... 158 ....... 2000 ... 1.17" ...... 0" .... -4.87"
357mag ..... 158 ....... 2100 ... 1.03" ...... 0" .... -4.37"

Again, my 158grn 357mag load demonstrates the flattest trajectory through 150yds of any other round listed (except the hypothetical 2000fps and 2100fps rounds). Therefore, I make the unabashed claim that the .357mag. is absolutely the best performing caliber of the lot for deer hunting at any range out to 150yds. No one should feel under gunned when using their 357mag levergun hunting deer out to 150yds which I believe is the practical and humane limit for an open sighted levergun in these caliber ranges.

* My chrono data generated averaging 2ea 10rd strings under the following local conditions; Jefferson County, CO, 9/13/09 - Sunny, 54°, 6,100ft asl
** gglass revised data.

[Old Ironsights]

Steve... I really think you are underselliing the 180... either BB our handload equivelents

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l= ... tail&p=100

... 5. 18.5 inch Marlin 1894

a. Item 19A/20-180gr. Hard Cast = 1851 fps
b. Item 19B/20-170gr. JHC = 1860 fps
c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 2153 fps
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 2298 fps

[COSteve]

I just heard about Buffalo Bore's claims myself and checked it out on their web page. I'm surprised at the level of performance they reach with a 357 round. Based on that information, I'm updating my charts.

Caliber ...... Grns ...... MV ...... ME ... 100yd MV . 100yd ME
25-20 ......... 79 ....... 1645 .... 475 ..... 1252 ........ 275
32-20 ........ 107 ....... 1860 .... 822 ..... 1378 ........ 451
38-40 ........ 168 ....... 1574 .... 924 ..... 1165 ........ 506
44-40 ........ 205 ....... 1375 .... 861 ..... 1078 ........ 529
38sl+P *...... 158 ....... 1421 .... 708 ..... 1122 ........ 422
38sl **........ 158 ....... 1300 .... 675 ..... 1079 ........ 465
357mag * .... 158 ...... 1822 ... 1165 ..... 1397 ........ 685
357mag **... 180 ....... 1574 ..... 990 ..... 1254 ........ 629
Buffalo Bore Ammo from an 18.5" Marlin
357mag ..... 158 ....... 2153 ... 1626 ..... 1665 ........ 973
357mag ..... 180 ....... 1851 ... 1369 ..... 1468 ........ 861

This new data clearly shows that BB's .357mag loads deliver significantly more energy on target at 100yds than any of the other calibers listed. In fact, it shows that BB's 158grn load delivers more ME at 100yds than any other caliber produces at the muzzle!! Also, their 180grn hardcast ammo has the same ME at 100yds that the 44-40 has at the muzzle. Not surprisingly, the trajectory information for 50yds, 100yds, and 150yds assuming a 100yd zero is also great.

Caliber ...... Grns ...... MV ..... 50yd ... 100yd . 150yd
25-20 ......... 79 ....... 1645 ... 1.90" ...... 0" .. -10.39"
32-20 ........ 107 ....... 1860 ... 1.50" ...... 0" ... -6.26"
38-40 ........ 168 ....... 1574 ... 2.18" ...... 0" ... -8.60"
44-40 ........ 205 ....... 1375 ... 2.78" ...... 0" .. -10.28"
38sl+P *...... 158 ....... 1421 ... 2.54" ...... 0" ... -9.45"
38sl **........ 158 ....... 1300 ... 3.01" ...... 0" .. -10.79"
357mag * .... 158 ....... 1822 ... 1.47" ..... 0" ... -5.96"
357mag **... 180 ....... 1574 ... 2.92" ...... 0" .. -10.39"
Buffalo Bore Ammo from an 18.5" Marlin
357mag ...... 158 ...... 2153 ... 0.97" ...... 0" ... -4.13"
357mag ...... 180 ...... 1851 ... 1.37" ...... 0" ... -5.42"

* My chrono data generated averaging 2ea 10rd strings under the following local conditions; Jefferson County, CO, 9/13/09 - Sunny, 54°, 6,100ft asl
** gglass revised data.