Author Topic: 45lc vs 357mag (Read 8220 times)

mattt · « **on:** August 23, 2008, 10:08:02 AM »

Went out to the gunstore today to get a marlin lever in 35 rem and ended up with a ruger new blackhawk in 357. It was on sale and just couldn't pass it up since I didn't have a single action revolver . They also had one in 45LC but I chose the 357 besides the bullit size what kind of performance difference is there between the 45LC and the 357mag. thanks

cleveland48 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 23, 2008, 04:50:56 PM »

I just recently bought a blackhawk in a 45lc. But I have fired several colt pythons, and smith and wesson 686's in 357. I have always enjoyed shooting that caliber. I've read in a magazine somewhere that the blackhawk in 357 is almost indestructable. Don't know how true that is, but that is a fun caliber I think.

mattt · « **Reply #2 on:** August 23, 2008, 05:01:16 PM »

I have never shot or owned a 357 before.I am getting tired hurting my arm with my big bore revolvers 500 mag,454 casull and a few 44 mags so thought a 357 might be nice for target and plinking.

rickt300 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 23, 2008, 05:51:59 PM »

I have a revolver or single shot pistol in all the popular straight cased rounds. I have 3 357 magnums. When I was younger a 357 was good enough for most hunting chores but with todays proliferation of bigger rounds it often gets little attention on the forums as a hunting round. Truth is the 357 is plenty for just about any reasonable chore hunting game up to around 200 pounds at reasonable iron sight ranges. I meant to use one of my 357's last year but shot all my deer with rifles for some reason. The 45 long Colt is also a favorite and in a Ruger can be loaded to outmatch the 44 magnum. I feel the 45 is more special purpose as i keep mine sighted in for heavy cast bullet loads and don't use it much. The 357's get all kinds of workouts from plinking, just being carried, small game.

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #4 on:** August 24, 2008, 01:36:10 AM »

The .45 RBH is probably a better choice on game the size of and bigger than deer, But, My .357s have taken everything from ground squirrel to deer when I want them to. I understand they work on black bear also but I haven't had a chance to try that yet.

I never feel under gunned with my .357s.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #5 on:** August 24, 2008, 02:16:41 AM »

the 45 will kill better and do it with no more recoil and alot less muzzle blast. No comparison in my opinion. Im not a fan of the 357. to me its notihng but a noisy 38 special. You have to put up with ear spliting muzzle blast and marginal performance on big game.

Cayoot · « **Reply #6 on:** August 24, 2008, 03:17:45 AM »

I am also a fan of the .45 Colt. However, unlike Lloyd (whom I think is a pretty smart feller) I don't see any comparison between the .45 and the .357. It is like comparing a Ford F-150 to a Honda Gold Wing motorcycle. They are both excellent vehicles in their own right, but they are designed for very different reasons.

I feel that the .45 Colt should be compared to the .44 Mag and the .357 should be compared to either the .45 acp or 9 mm.

Hense, while have a very nice .44 mag (Dan Wesson 8 inch), it very rarely comes out. Most of my big bore shooting is done with the .41 Mag and .45 Colt....(I find the .44 mag to be a "middle magnum" which doesn't really excite me).

I also have 2 .45 ACPs, 1 9 mm, and 5 .357s. (So I guess you can figure out which of these I prefer!)

To me, the .357 is the single most useful and versatile handgun caliber available. It is also one of the most economical to shoot (of the serious calibers).

Everybody should have at least one IMO.

45454 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 28, 2008, 02:55:03 PM »

Cayoot

,
I think you've hit it.
I do have thanks to Bob Milek from me,to drop the 357 mag.
Bob Milek was right on his bear hunt;"No more 357's for me.(paraphrased)".
He went from then on to the 44 mag.
Before I get jumped on,I used a 357 mag for 13 years.Yes,it does have its place.
Reloaded some 33K rounds for it.
I've since been using a 44 mag,45 Colt,and 454 Casull.Never looked back to the 357.
For those wanting lighter loads in the 44 mag,use the 44 Special loads.They are fun.

rickt300 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 29, 2008, 05:45:41 AM »

I like the 357 though much of what I have used it for could have been done with a 22 rimfire. It does have some usefullness as a deer round but mostly I have used it to finish off downed game hit my centerfire rifles. There is a considerable muzzle blast when useing high pressure loadings and slow powders (2400 and 296). I am carrying my 357 this year to fill one or two of my doe tags. I am very tempted to use Universal clays at 7.0 grains in my deer load simply to reduce the noise factor. All you have to do is shoot one 158 grain round loaded with 14.0 grs. of 2400 without hearing protection and your ears will ring for a couple of days. I don't wear ear plugs while hunting.

petemi · « **Reply #9 on:** August 31, 2008, 03:52:55 AM »

I have a 6.5 inch stainless .357 Blackhawk which goes everywhere with me on the farm along with its partner a .357 Handi Rifle which is being rechambered to .357 Max. They are both very useful and versatile. I wouldn't be without either.

Old Griz · « **Reply #10 on:** August 31, 2008, 06:46:25 PM »

Congratulations! You've got a fine and fun gun. The .357 is a lot of fun to shoot and hunt with, especially when going after small game with .38 Specials. I've got six .357s in all, and they get a lot more attention than my .45s these days with the price of ammo going up so. I also have a Marlin lever gun in .357 and it is really a lot of fun. It's more accurate than my .30-30 and will also work on moderate range deer, and coyotes. It's a great handgun/rifle combination. (Just something for you to think about now that you've got the handgun!)

bilmac · « **Reply #11 on:** September 01, 2008, 03:17:36 AM »

Over the years I've had 45s and 44s and 357s in both 6 shooters and leverguns. But now I only have the 357s. I've shot enough deer with pistol calibers (including the 45, and 44) to know that I don't want to do that anymore. To me the results with any of them is about the same, even with a good hit the deer or antellope is standing there waiting to bleed out before it dies. If you want to shoot deer or antellope size critters even a 30-30 is a lot more humane.

Graybeard · « **Reply #12 on:** September 01, 2008, 12:13:46 PM »

Quote from: bilmac on September 01, 2008, 03:17:36 AM

Over the years I've had 45s and 44s and 357s in both 6 shooters and leverguns. But now I only have the 357s. I've shot enough deer with pistol calibers (including the 45, and 44) to know that I don't want to do that anymore. To me the results with any of them is about the same, even with a good hit the deer or antellope is standing there waiting to bleed out before it dies. If you want to shoot deer or antellope size critters even a 30-30 is a lot more humane.

I totally disagree with you on that. I've shot a LOT of deer with the .44 Magnum and on average they die quicker and closer to the point I shot them than have those I've shot with bottle neck centerfire rifles.

44 Man · « **Reply #13 on:** September 01, 2008, 03:51:16 PM »

Here's my take on the .357 vs .45 thing. I took my first deer with a .357 mag and factory Winchester Silvertip HP's. It was a 70 yd shot with open sights, the deer ran about 100 yds and collapsed. When I opened him up (nice 8 point), his lungs were like soup and the bullet never exited. That was about a picture perfect preformance from a bullet. Had I clipped a rib or had to push that 125 gr HP through a shoulder, I'm not sure what would have happened but I was happy with the results. I have owned many .357's and enjoyed all of them. there are not many guns that are so much fun shooting with .38 spl plinking bullets. But we are not talking popping tin cans at the dump, we are talking about an all around handgun. My big objection is the same as Lloyd's, the tremendous muzzle blast you get with high preformance loads. When I switched to a .44 Mag for deer hunting, I was immeadiately aware of the lower tone, abiet still LOUD, muzzle blast. Back then in the 'young and stupid' days of not wearing ear protection, I found the noise of the .44 much more pleasant to my ears than the .357. Enter the .45 colt. Having several in my later years, I have found them, even in loadings running around 900 fps, to kill better than the .357 did and with an even milder report. It's a just plain more friendly gun all around. I prefer to stay with loads in the 900 or 1000 fps range rather than push them hard. They don't need it to kill deer. If I want to blow bones apart and leave more bloodshot meat, I'll go back to the .44 mag. Nope, now days you'll usually find a .45 colt or 44 spl loaded at around 850/900 fps in my belt and I am completely confident in either to do any job I ask of them. And I don't have to put up with all of the buck and roar of the magnums and the deer are just as dead. I believe old Skeeter Skelton summed it up best many years ago when he said that the old '45 killed all out of proportion' to it's paper ballistics. 44 Man

dpe.ahoy · « **Reply #14 on:** September 04, 2008, 09:20:22 AM »

+1 44 Man. I've killed many deer with 357, 44mag and 45 Colt. I do carry 357 sometimes but have used the 45 most in recent years. The 357 in the rifle is a different animal than out of the pistol though. It will do the job on deer, but would recommend 158 soft nose over the lighter hollow points. The 357 in a rifle is the one the kids always want to use when we go shooting. If you live where large critters play, I would go with the 44 or 45. DP

Catfish · « **Reply #15 on:** September 04, 2008, 10:56:53 AM »

I`m a big bore fan, and have taken more deer with a .44 mag. than any other round. The last 4 deer that I have taken with a handgun where with a .357 max. though. They were shot with a 158 gr. XTP from yardages for 50 to abt. 85. All from the side and double lung and all run from 30 to 50 yrds, which I think is very reasonable. There is no way I would try anything but a lung shot with the 158 gr. HP`s though. I have some hard cast gas check bullet that I have been going to try for the shots where I need penatration. Don`t worry about leading if you load the Lead Head gas checked bullets, or similar. I have pushed them to abt. 2,600 fps. with no leading. That said, the .44 mag., or the .45 Colt is a far better round for deer. The only .44 bullet I ever recovered from a deer was from a real nice 10 pt. buck shot in the right hind quater at 135 yrds. and it was just under the skin of the right frount shoulder.

Tallwalker · « **Reply #16 on:** September 14, 2008, 02:44:59 AM »

It seems with experience that we often come full circle to appreciate the things that just work. I own more .357's than handguns in the larger bores, but I have to admit really enjoying my 45 Colt with 900 fps, or so loads. Someday soon, I'm going to shoot a .41 Special. I am quite impressed with the velocity (1000-1100 fps) achievable with low powder charges. It would seem a very pleasant, and effective round for woodswalking / hunting most things.

Cayoot · « **Reply #17 on:** September 15, 2008, 07:35:49 AM »

Hey Tallwalker...I agree with you about the .41 spl. Infact, I just purchased a beautiful S&W 686-4 (4 inch tube) that Hamilton Bowen has agreed to rechamber into .41 spl and cut the barrel down to 3 inches for me. I first read about the caliber in John Taffins' book "Shooting Big Bore Six Guns". To me, it seem like it will be a most wonderful general purpose carry gun!

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #18 on:** September 15, 2008, 08:55:35 AM »

The ruger frame is strong enough to handle the 45 Colt reloaded to 44 mag specs. do not try this with a colt or colt clone. They usually do not work after. But in comparing the 357 to the 45 colt in factory ammo. The 357 has a wider variety of ammo acvailable from 110 grain JHP to 180 grain hard cast or other jacketed hollow points, not to mention shot shells and all the 38 specials you could ever want.
The 45 colt out of the factory is equal to about 45 Acp and is what I would call the bottom end of the hunting calibers. I know I just started a fight but let me explain. When you hand load the 45 colt, it can do everything that 44 mag does with a wider and heavier bullet. There are some firms that make heavy loads for the 45 Colt such as Buffalo bore but again only in the Ruger.
I think you did well with the 357 and will be happy with it as everything from plinking, small game, medium game and up through deer.

crossfire · « **Reply #19 on:** October 04, 2008, 07:13:09 AM »

If you wish your .357 Blackhawk had more power, you can always get another cylinder and rechamber it for the .357 Bain & Davis or .356 GNR.

safetysheriff · « **Reply #20 on:** October 04, 2008, 03:19:05 PM »

the heavy weight of the .357 BH' by Ruger makes it eat recoil, even in blued steel in 4 5/8'' barrel. i know because i have one. it will put a 180 gr' oregon trail cast bullet through an 8'' tree trunk like nobody's business! that's a handload with much more power than we'd expected. i think that elmer keith is the one who wrote years ago that the .357 mag' would outdo any factory-loaded 45 (long) colt that he'd ever used. i can believe it. today that may no longer be true, of course; but that doesn't make a heavily-loaded .357 anemic.

i would not re-chamber to a .357 bain and davis. in revolvers the cartridge 'setback' from the bottle neck can be very problematic. i'd just load the .357 heavily as a handload or else buy heavy loads from buffalo bore.

take care,

ss'

454Puma · « **Reply #21 on:** October 05, 2008, 04:54:58 PM »

mattt
As already been stated they are two very different animals! I own both, shoot both with it's limitations the 357 Mag is a hell of a round-In a rifle - it comes alive! Same with the 45 LC in a pistol with it's limitations a excellent round! In a rifle -it is a thumper on just about anything you'd want to shoot-I call it a poor man's 45-70!

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #22 on:** October 06, 2008, 01:46:08 AM »

I went through and read all the posts and this one from cayoot hit it on the head. THere is no comparison. The 357 was designed first and foremost to be a round for self defense and police officers and it did that job admirably but has it limitations in the game field. This thread has changed to a 44 vs 45 argument and that arguent isnt even worth arguing. the 44 and the 45 are about identical in killing power and versitility. What one will do so will the other. Its no differnt then comparing the 270 and 280. Its a matter of personal tasted. I prefer the 44 mag mostly because guns chambered in it tend to more often be very accurate. The 357 will kill a deer or even a bear. Its been done to many times to waste time arguing about it but its just a round that never did a thing for me. Again that is a matter of personal taste and alot of people dont agree with me on it.

Quote from: Cayoot on August 24, 2008, 03:17:45 AM

I am also a fan of the .45 Colt. However, unlike Lloyd (whom I think is a pretty smart feller) I don't see any comparison between the .45 and the .357. It is like comparing a Ford F-150 to a Honda Gold Wing motorcycle. They are both excellent vehicles in their own right, but they are designed for very different reasons.

I feel that the .45 Colt should be compared to the .44 Mag and the .357 should be compared to either the .45 acp or 9 mm.

Hense, while have a very nice .44 mag (Dan Wesson 8 inch), it very rarely comes out. Most of my big bore shooting is done with the .41 Mag and .45 Colt....(I find the .44 mag to be a "middle magnum" which doesn't really excite me).

I also have 2 .45 ACPs, 1 9 mm, and 5 .357s. (So I guess you can figure out which of these I prefer!)

To me, the .357 is the single most useful and versatile handgun caliber available. It is also one of the most economical to shoot (of the serious calibers).

Everybody should have at least one IMO.

safetysheriff · « **Reply #23 on:** October 06, 2008, 12:31:20 PM »

ok, try this:

www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/357magnum.htm

see what major wesson and elmer keith had to say about using the .357.

performance difference: (the original question!) .357 mag' ammo is cheaper to make at home - and may be cheaper when store bought - than is the .45LC. .357 is probably a more efficient (cost-wise) killer of game up through the size of white tails.

handloaded .45 LC's in a strong revolver will generally not equal the .44 mag' unless used in something like a Freedom Arms I'd guess. in other words, I don't agree that a .45LC in a Ruger BH' equals a .44 mag' in a Ruger Super Blackhawk. not for my money.

take care,

ss'

S.B. · « **Reply #24 on:** October 07, 2008, 03:40:08 AM »

Actually, this debate was started in 1935 when S&W brought the .357 cartridge out, and rages on today. Lots of good responses, here. Personally, I think it comes down to personal tastes and what a person already owns? Some can't tolerate the recoil of bigger handgun calibers.

Keith L · « **Reply #25 on:** October 07, 2008, 07:55:52 AM »

I couldn't make up my mind so I got a couple of each...

Cap'n Jon · « **Reply #26 on:** October 27, 2008, 02:48:50 PM »

Got one of each a 686 6" in .357 and the ruger blackhawk 5 3/4" (or 5 5/8", can't remember) bbl conv. in .45Lc.

jimster · « **Reply #27 on:** October 28, 2008, 06:14:13 AM »

I'm a 45 Colt fan after using all of them all over many years. When we were young we gave the Ruger's a work out with heavy jacketed bullets and lots of W296...it would equal 44 mags yes, even surpass them, but the 44 mags can also be handloaded to amazing power as well....so I would think both 44's and the 45 Colts are pretty good at what they are supposed to do, break shoulders on both sides. I stopped using the 45 Colt
like that years ago. (we were insane when we were young) I found if I approach 900 fps with a heavy cast bullet it still breaks both shoulders of a white tail, and pretty much does all I need to do, best part of it all is, when I touch it off in the woods I don't hear the ringing in my ears for the next two weeks like those high pitched 357's. A 45 colt out of a rifle barrel is no slouch either. If I want more than 850/900 fps, I'll go with the 44 mag, or the 454, but I have no need for any of that in the State of Michigan, so 45 Colt is my favorite. Less noise, less pressure, and more pleasure to touch off in the woods where you don't have ear protection. For me it's the perfect packing gun that can do many things, but I have to handload to take advantage of 45 Colt.

blhof · « **Reply #28 on:** October 28, 2008, 08:43:12 AM »

I've got both 357 and 45 colt and like shooting both, but cost wise for reloading; the 357 wins hands down. I've got several hundred once fired brass in 357 and 38 as they seem to be disposable, all pickups from local ranges. They use less powder and work well with cast bullets, reloads can run as cheap as a box of 22's. For hunting I go with the 357max or 45lc.

S.B. · « **Reply #29 on:** October 28, 2008, 09:31:15 AM »

Quote from: blhof on October 28, 2008, 08:43:12 AM

reloads can run as cheap as a box of 22's.

Are you sure about the cost being so low. Have you purchased any primers and bullets let alone powder lately? I've bought .22 bulk packs at WallyWorld for under $2@50. Recently .22 bulk pachs were running $10@500 and that's $1@50.