This is a discussion on 357 vs. 45 ? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by glockman10mm The 357 magnum gets it's power thru energy churned up by it's velocity. The 45 gets it's power thru it's weight ...
Bigger diameter bullet; heavier bullet; launched at slightly lower velocity (than a .357)
Representative loads - .357 - 158 gr @ 1475 ft/sec, .44 mag - 240 gr @ 1300 ft/sec
Kinetic energy = half the mass times the square of velocity
Momentum = mass times velocity
Either way, the .44 mag wins the numbers contest.
NRA Endowment Member
NROI Chief Range Officer
88 magnum. It shoots through schools.
Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth
I'm not into caliber wars per say. I prefer the wheel for most applications to my needs.
To the OP, the 40 is a compromise, and is a very adequate round. But it does not have the energy of the 357mag, only approaching it in it's lighter faster bullets.
The 357 even gets fairly close to the 10mm, until heavier bullets come into play. The 10mm pretty much trounced everything until it gets to the 41mag, where it loses.
The advantage of the auto pistol cartridge are it's shorter lenghts and high capacity.
The disadvantage is smaller case and therefore limited powder capacity.
Any of them will get you thru the night.
As a rule of thumb, I use, you want about 200 fpe for every 100 pound of body weight of the intended animal/ bad guy.
You can reach a point of dimininshing returns if you go to far in Either direction.
The magic formula is to balance bullet , bullet weight, and velocity to achieve the intended results.
It can seem complicated, but once you have an understanding of the basics, it gets pretty simple.
This is actually one of the better caliber discussions that I've seen. For me, it all boils down to that the .357 justifies my next purchase, since I don't have one yet .
'Clinging to my guns and religion
WHEC724, if you can find a k frame, get one. I swear I think they have the slickest actions from the factory. These new ones feel they have sand in the gears.
This is the best writeup I have seen about calibers. IMHO it boils down to carry what you shoot well and are comfortable with. The way I look at it as long as it is 9mm or above, it is going to perform if you perform and deliver the bullets to critical locations. AKA shot placement.
here is the authors qualifications if anyone is wondering:I was a member of the Joint Service Wound Ballistic Integrated Product Team, the U.S. government study that gathered numerous experts from a variety of disciplines, including military and law enforcement end-users, trauma surgeons, aero ballisticians, weapon and munitions engineers, and other scientific specialists to conduct a 4 year, 6 million dollar study to determine what terminal performance assessment best reflected the actual findings noted in OCONUS combat the past few years. Courtney's "hydrostatic shock" was NOT found to be a valid or relevant factor. Likewise, I work at a large Level I trauma center and get to treat people who are shot in the face and jaws--guess what, NO remote CNS or other "hydrostatic shock" effects of the type Courtney espouses have occurred in ANY of these patients.
Currently I am qualified on .45 ACP 1911 and 9 mm Glock; if I ever go back to LE Patrol duties, I'll likely carry a .40 S&W M&P. I don't really care that much about which one I am issued, as ALL the handgun service calibers work similarly.
During the early to mid 1980’s, like many people, I was duped by articles singing the praises of the .357 Mag 125 gr JHP. I carried a 4” 686 and a customized 3” M13 loaded with Fed 125 gr JHP. However, after going on active military duty and being in a position to test ammunition at the Letterman Army Institute of Research with Dr. Fackler, it became obvious that the .357 Magnum 125 gr JHP’s tended to have relatively shallow penetration, frequently fragmented with resultant decrease in permanent crush cavity, and had temporary cavities of insufficient size to contribute significantly to wounding. In addition, these loads had a large muzzle flash and blast, as well as a relatively harsh recoil which inhibited accuracy and re-engagement speed. As the FBI established a science based ammunition testing program, their research data also showed less than stellar performance from the lightweight .357 Mag loadings, including the 125 gr JHP’s. For those individuals who doubt evidence based research and prefer “street results”, the CHP, the largest agency to issue .357 Mag 125 gr JHP’s on the West Coast, clearly reports significantly better results in their officer involved shootings since switching to .40 S&W 180 gr JHP loadings, based on officer perception, objective crime scene measurements, as well as the physiological damage described in the relevant autopsy studies. The CHP used a variety of .357 Mag loads, depending upon what was available via the state contract. According to the published CHP test data from 1989-90, the .357 Magnum load used immediately prior to the CHP transition to .40 S&W was the Remington 125 gr JHP with an ave. MV of 1450 f/s from their duty revolvers. I first saw the data when it was presented during a wound ballistic conference I attended at the CHP Academy in the early 1990's; I heard it discussed again at a CHP Officer Involved Shootings Investigation Team meeting in November of 1997 at Vallejo, CA. The information reviewed the differences in ammunition terminal performance such as penetration depth, recovered bullet characteristics, tissue damage and other physiological measurements and physical evidence detailed during forensic analysis.
he has many more posts on caliber on m4carbine.net.Dr. Roberts is currently on staff at Stanford University Medical Center; this is a large teaching hospital and Level I Trauma center were he performs hospital dentistry and surgery. After completing his residency at Navy Hospital Oakland in 1989 while on active military duty, he studied at the Army Wound Ballistic Research Laboratory at the Letterman Army Institute of Research and became one of the first members of the International Wound Ballistic Association. Since then, he has been tasked with performing military, law enforcement, and privately funded independent wound ballistic testing and analysis. He remains a Navy Reserve officer and has recently served on the Joint Service Wound Ballistic IPT, as well as being a consultant to the Joint FBI-USMC munitions testing program and the TSWG MURG program. He is frequently asked to provide wound ballistic technical assistance to numerous U.S. and allied SOF units and organizations. In addition, he is a technical advisor to the Association of Firearms and Toolmark Examiners, as well as to a variety of Federal, State, and municipal law enforcement agencies. He has been a sworn Reserve Police Officer in the San Francisco Bay Area, where he now he serves in an LE training role.
here is are some EXCELLENT read on calibers here:
The 380 performance was scary enough to make me switch my bug....
The entire forum can be read here:
While not trying to discredit this write up by Roberts, there are many holes in his conclusions, as well as Facklers. One that glared out at me was the findings of the great performance of the 40 in the late 90s. The 40 has since then been redifined and the perscription has been changed to use heavier bullets since then.
The one thing that no one can deny is the 125 grain 357 magnum at 1450 fps is still the standard by which all others are compared. That says alot. Even though I prefer heavy for caliber bullets, I have to respect the 357 mag.
The muzzle flash I believe is an overrated issue to. As far as recoil, yes it will be felt on both ends. In my opinion, much money and time has been spent on making everything from the 9mm and 40 perform like the magnum, while making it low flash, and easy to shoot by a wide range of people.
As for the facial shots and his statement about not seeing any difference, the o ly thing I can say is from my experience .
I use a 22 for small game hunting, and shot a rabit in the head with a cci mini mag hollowpoint. It messed up the head a little. Later on I took a similar shot on a rabbit using a cci stinger. When I picked it up all that was left was a strip of fur with an ear, and a few teeth on it. Call it what you want, hydrostatic shock or whatever, but the speed and more frangible bullet made a BIG difference here.
"Violence is seldom the answer, but when it is the answer it is the only answer".
"A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves".
Shot one with my 125Gr jHP .357 in the body and it was still alive. hit one with a head shot with a 9mm JHP. Still alive. Another a body shot with 10mm buffalo bore 180gr jhp. lived. All required follow up shots. I hit them with .223 ball and hornaday tap and it looks like the 22 mag sometimes, other times it obliterates them. All about shot placement.
Take the articles for what it is worth but most medical pros I talk to cannot tell the difference between calibers and that guy is more of an expert than any of use are on ballistics.
I have heard that as well, about MDs saying that they cannot tell caliber difference by the wound.
I like the shooting charcteristics of the 9mm, 40 and 45acp, as far as pleasent to shoot. I think this is why alot of people like the 40, as it's effective, and easily controllable. It's not intimidating even for a new shooter. I think the 45 is actually easier to shoot than the 40.
Out of the 3 mentioned, I would prefer the 357, due to it's overall size, weight, velocity, and sectional density. Take away any of these things, and it would degrade it's performance severely.
I also like the 38 special. But here I prefer the heaviest bullet possible due to the smaller case and hense, limited velocity.
My opinion here is just that, my opinion based on my experience.
I would say there is some credence to Fackler's testing. The only problem is the experts can't agree. But what we can agree on is the track record of the 357. And the 45. Both have become legends and the standard we measure the rest by.
That about sums it up.I would say there is some credence to Fackler's testing. The only problem is the experts can't agree. But what we can agree on is the track record of the 357. And the 45. Both have become legends and the standard we measure the rest by.
I would suggest that technological improvements in projectile design and construction, as with many other calibers, has only improved the performance of the .357 Mag, eliminating/reducing some of the problems of earlier projectiles.
"I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".