357 mag

[lisa1lacy2]

What do you guys think of the 357 mag and deer?

[SLAVAGE]

hmm ide say very close shots an have a nice 170 180 flat point cast bullet or a nice 180 hp

[Redhawk1]

I would call it the very minimal I would use for deer. A large quality bullet and loaded hot.  

[LMM]

I've hunted deer with a Colt King Cobra 4" for the most part, Ruger GP100 6" last two years and will be using a Ruger Blackhawk 6.5" this fall.  Prior to that was using a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum 7.5".  Regardless of what you use it is all about shot placement.  I haven't lost a deer yet.  Farthest shot was last year at about 75yds using Buffalo Bore 180gr Hardcast.  Used Buffalo Bore 158gr Gold Dot the year before at about 60yds. The deer taken with my Colt King Cobra were all less than 40yds using Federal 125gr JHP.  This fall will be using either Buffalo Bore 158gr Gold Dot again, Double Tap 158gr Gold Dot or 158gr Hornady XTP/HP over 16.5grs of Hodgdon H110.  If I could find some Remington 158gr JSP bullets locally would work up some loads and try them.  Haven't decided yet and still experimenting with my Blackhawk.  I'm favoring 158gr bullets.

[lisa1lacy2]

Thanks for the feedback guys just wondering :wink:

[Mikey]

lisa1lacy2:  The 357 from handgun length barrels is adequate to 50-75 yds.  The same loads from a carbine or rifle length barrel stretches the distance and the cartridge's capabilities out to about 100 yds.

I prefer shorter barrelled handguns with heavier loads.  My preference is for the 200 grain cast semiwadcutter and I limit my shots to about 50 yds unless I get that perfectly clear shot out a bit farther.

I used to know a local LEO who used a 4" 357 and 158 gn Reminton factory loads and they would shoot through the chest out to 50 yds.  

As LMM said, regardless of what you use it is all about shot placement.  

HTH.  Mikey.

[Jerry Lester]

The 357 magnum is just as deadly on deer as any other handgun caliber as long as you use it within it's limits, and of course, place your shots where they need to go.

I've been using the 357 magnum for the last several years in both a rifle, and a revolver for deer. I prefer Remington 158g SPs, but have had great success with 158g XTP-FPs, and have killed a few deer with various other bullets/weights. I've found that with the 357, you really do need at least some expansion to aid in quicker kills, but you don't want to over do it to the point that penetration suffers. Most HP 357 bullets tend to open up too quickly, and in extreme cases(shoulder blades at very close ranges) will at times not even make it to the vitals. XTP-HPs are about the best as far as holding together, but even they will give poor penetration(through shoulders) under most close range situations.

If you'll use a tough 158g SP bullet at around 1200-1400 fps, keep your ranges at 60 yards or less, and don't try crazy shots like a Texas heart shot, you'll do fine with the 357 magnum in a revolver. Use the same bullet at around 1600-1700 fps in a rifle, make a sensible shot, and you'll do fine out to 100 yards or slightly father.

[Badnews Bob]

They work well.

[Catfish]

It`s the min. round I would consider in handgun. I personally used the .44 mag. for many years, but my boy did take a deer with a .357 mag. years ago, when he was 12. My perfered bullet is the 158 grn. Serria. This bullet seem to give me the best in accuracy and terminal preformance. I also perfer Win.-296 powder in all my hunting loads for all handgun rounds. If you can put the bullet in the chest cavity this bullet with max. loads of Win. 296 will take deer as far as you can place the bullet well.

[Hooker]

I've taken a few deer with the 357 a couple dozen pigs at least, and one coyote. I caught the yote sleeping by some round bales I drilled him clean through at just over 100 yards. My longest deer shot 70 yards with the deer facing me at a slight angle, also a pass through. I'd say out to 100yds  with the right loads if you practice the 357 will get her done .
I prefer bullets 158-185 gr hard cast with gas checks I like unique and AA#9 powders. I load them for accuracy not max velocity.

Catfish how can you take the muzzle blast you get when using 296?

Pat

[S.B.]

Too light for any thing but very close, can miss the vitals, shots.

[rybo]

I shot my first handgun deer with one this year. 23 yds thru the chest, just about no expansion with a 170 gr speer gold dot soft pt. If I would ever use it again I'd drop to a lighter, better expanding bullet.

[S.B.]

I shot my first handgun deer with one this year. 23 yds thru the chest, just about no expansion with a 170 gr speer gold dot soft pt. If I would ever use it again I'd drop to a lighter, better expanding bullet.

My point exactly, they just aren't big enough for deer?

[Larry Gibson]

I shot my first handgun deer with one this year. 23 yds thru the chest, just about no expansion with a 170 gr speer gold dot soft pt. If I would ever use it again I'd drop to a lighter, better expanding bullet.

My point exactly, they just aren't big enough for deer?

Not so. I've said this numerous times before with my comments based on seeing quite a few deer shot with the .357; With revolvers of 4-6 inch barrels use a fast stepping 125 HP with the Federal and Winchesters performing well. With revolvers of 7 1/2 - 8 3/8 inch barrels the 140 - 150 HPs work best.  The heavier bullets don't come into their own until 10+ inch barrels are used, particularly in the Contender.  While the heavy cast or jacketed bullets will kill deer from the shorter barreled revolvers if the bullet is properly placed their performance is not the best.  With the proper selection of bullet for the length of barrel the performance of the 357 Magnum is maximised and does very nicely on deer at practical handgun ranges.

Larry Gibson

[S.B.]

LMG, how many instant, drop on the spot kills have you seen with the .357 mags? Isn't it a hunters resposibilty to make humane kills?

[Bullseye]

Sorry but in my opinion a drop on the spot is rare with any gun and does not mean anything.  I shot a deer with a 45-70 pistol this year and put it right through the boiler room destroying the chest cavity.  The deer still went about 60-70 yards.  Does this mean the 45-70 is not big enough either?  I have shot deer with a 357 maximum, 41 mag and the 45-70 and 1 of the probably 15 have dropped on the spot.  Ethical hunting means placing a shot in the vitals and having a clean kill with a caliber big enough to do the job and the 357 mag will do it.  If ethical hunting means dropping a deer on the spot, then there are not many ethical hunters.

[S.B.]

A few issues back American Handgunner's Clint Smith wrote an article on hunting Texas whitetails with the major magnum handguns. Check this story out and tell me that the .357 is a good choice for deer? By the way, this isn't the first or only article that comes to the same conclusion. I'm not saying the .357 won't kill deer just that it's not the best ethical choice.

[jro45]

If I were going to use my 357 to hunt deer I would use my contender 357 that has a 10" barrel on it. That way I could get a lot of velocity and use it to 100 yds.

[longwalker]

The first two deer I shot with a handgun were with a .357 I used 158 soft point and hollow point factory loads. Both shots were within 20 feet. Both deer went down like a sack of seed.  I was able to recover the Hollow point bullet

I found a real super deal on a Ruger SRH and purchased it. Since then I have used it almost exclusively on Whitetail deer. Given the choice I use the 44 Magnum. I would not hessitate to use the .357 if I no longer had the SRH.

longwalker

[lisa1lacy2]

Thanks for all the info guys  

 :oops: sorry didn't mean to stir up a hornets nest

[Hooker]

Thanks for all the info guys  

 :oops: sorry didn't mean to stir up a hornets nest

Brian this argument goes on every time the subject comes up. Just like Ford vs Chevy and Fat girls vs Skinny chicks.
Nothing serious just good clean fun :grin:

Pat

[Jerry Lester]

LMG, how many instant, drop on the spot kills have you seen with the .357 mags? Isn't it a hunters resposibilty to make humane kills?

Believe me when I say, I'm not usually one to stir in a hopeless pot, but this is kinda silly S.B.

I've killed a lot of deer(well into the 3 digits), and I'm sure anybody out there reading this thread that's actually put in the field time(instead of hanging on the words of a gun writer) can attest to the fact that you'll never garrantee a "drop in their tracks" kill short of using a RPG, and even then it wouldn't surprize me to see a deer run off before falling.

I once blew a young bucks heart into several chunks, turning both lungs into jelly, with a 30-06, and a 180g RN SP bullet. This was at a whopping 50-60 yards, the deer was completely un-alarmed, and feeding. This particular deer managed to cover a couple hundred yards before finally falling. If it hadn't been for the blood trail, and me being positive I couldn't have missed, that deer could have easily been lost.

I'm not trying to argue with anybody. I've killed enough game, with enough combinations of weapons that normally I just steer away from "school house bickering". My only wish is that all you guys that are so quick to bow at the alters of gun writers, would try actually shooting/hunting a little with a caliber before being so quick to throw out a judgement on a subject you have no first hand experience on. If one of the gun writers started harping on how deadly the 357 magnum is on deer, every one of you guys would be busting you butt trying to kill a deer with one.

The 357 magnum, along with quite a few other older calibers are just not the "in thing" anymore. They're too slow, too light, or too tapered, or just too boring to the "trophy buck" crowd now days, so they get romped every time some serious shooter brings it up. The fact is, if they used to kill deer cleanly, they can still do it, and even better with the latest developments in components.

That's my last word on it...

[teamnelson]

I picked up something in this thread I'd like to hear more about if y'all are open. That being the difference between shooting yer 357 out of a 10" contender, and out of a shorter barreled revolver. For those of you that do hunt with a 357 Contender, what loads are you using?

[R.W.Dale]

Aw now come on :grin:  We all know it takes a handgun cartrige holding at least  30 grains of powder to kill those massive 160 ld whitetail anything less will bounce right off their thick hide.

[Larry Gibson]

LMG, how many instant, drop on the spot kills have you seen with the .357 mags? Isn't it a hunters resposibilty to make humane kills?

S.B.

Actually very few "dropped on the spot" when shot in the heart/lungs.  Most any experienced deer hunter will know that regardless of the cartridge or firearm used.  However, all of them did not go very far and were recoverable by any ethical hunter.  Several others have already commented on that.  Also as previously stated the .357 plus numerous other "obsolete" cartridges were effectively killing deer in their day and still will, all quite ethically.  If we apply the logic of your last sentence to choice of cartridges wouldn't it then also apply to the weapon?  If so then why do we hunt with handguns instead of rifles?  The .357 magnum is quite legal in numerous states so. Is the hunter who uses a .243 less "ethical the the one who uses a .300 magnum?  My point here is simply that defining "ethics" can be very difficult.  The point to my responce above was to help a fellow hunter use more effective ammuntion in his choice of handgun.  I believe that to be perfectly ethical.

Larry Gibson

[S.B.]

I'd have to agree, I chose my words poorly, and what I should of asked was how many have you seen taken with a .357 compared to the larger calibers,  popularly used to take deer? There has been lots of talk about .22 LR  and .22 center fire rifle used to take deer also,  but, I would never use these either.

[Redhawk1]

The only way I would use the .357 MAG, is if I did not have anything bigger. Sure it will work, but that would not be my first choice.  

[rybo]

Since my comment seemed to kick this off a little, I'll elaborate.
My deer ran 25 yds after being hit and died within seconds from massive internal bleeding, so it was a very clean kill. I used that 170 bullet because so many people I talked to were all about penetration, blah blah . I should have known better from my own experiences, and knowing the shots I was prepared to take that you don't need an overly sturdy bullet to blow thru a deer's rib cage. The entrance and exit wounds were bullet diameter size and left VERY little blood on the ground. Thankfully a track job was not needed. Although I'll probably be using a 44 from here on out, I would not hesitate to take my 357 back into the woods and keep my shot selection tight.

[Larry Gibson]

S.B.

Point well taken, doubt that we are in serious disagreement.  The .357 Mag is not my first choice either but I am of the opinion that with the proper loads it will suffice and would not hesitate to use it.  FYI; my choice with big game hunting revolvers leans toward my Ruger .41 or my Colt Anaconda .44.  As to the .22LR, yes it will kill deer (I killed several with it as a kid growing up on a ranch in western Oregon) but it is illegal and therefore may fall purview of being "unethical".  In many states .224 cal CF rifles are legal for deer.  Maybe not the best choice but if used within their limitations they will kill deer quite nicely.  Unethical?

I sure hate to get into ethical discussions because many rifle hunters consider it unethical to hunt with a handgun, any handgun.  There has been too many discussions (heated arguements?) over the use of tree stands, blinds, long range shooting, archery vs rifles, etc. ad nauseum.  Some claim we should kill "humanely" but I'm not sure if that's the same as "cleanly".  Many now want to be PC and say they "harvest" game (I don't buy into that...I kill what I shoot and have no qualms about it). If a heart/lung shot deer travels after being shot at what point is it not "humane" or not "clean", 25 yards, 50 yards, 100 yards? Is it "harvested" at the shot or when it dies?  Others always seem to want to say, "get a bigger gun" or some such.  Is the guy who can't afford to "get a bigger gun" or is smart enough to know he can't shoot one well enough at that time unethical if he still hunts with a legal firearm he already has and can use?  See what I mean, it's aweful hard to say what is right and what is wrong ethically.  A lot of questions without any good answers.  What is considered ethical or "the way to hunt" in one part of the country may be frowned upon in others.  Doesn't mean it's unethical does it?

Larry Gibson

[Redhawk1]

LMG, you got that right we don't want to start ethical discussions. It would lead to no good.