357 Ammo for Lightweight Snubby

[rockquarry]

Hey, all. With the summer months coming shortly, I've been considering what my EDC choices will be with the lighter clothing choices (i.e. shorts with no belt, etc).

I usually carry a stainless steel 357 on most winter days, and I've grown more and more respectful of that round of late. I hate to admit that I sold off a 360pd a while back because I grew frustrated in my search for ammo that was both a) effective and b) not so powerful that follow-up shots were all but impossible.

So I'm thinking again about getting a snubbie, preferably in 357. (I've considered getting an LCR in 327 for the extra round, but I'm not a big fan of Ruger in general and would be more inclined to get another J-frame.) So I figured I'd ask you guys if you know of any 357 ammo that is suitable for a lightweight snub; I'm inclined to think that the Golden Sabers or the Corbon DPX rounds may fit the bill? Looking for any personal experience people may have with those, of if any other ammo choices may be more appropriate.

Thanks!!

p.s. And, just to preempt any such suggestion, I'm not interested in carrying 38 special. I'm just not impressed with the performance in sub-3" barrels (inadequate/inconsistent expansion with most JHP rounds, and no interest in carrying wadcutters).

Confining this to .357 ammo per your post, try at least five or six ammos. Assuming you're a reasonably skilled shooter with .357 ammo in a small, light revolver, try them all at 25 yards. (I know - confrontations only occur at very short distances, etc., etc.) At distance, you'll quickly find what works best and if you can hit what you are aiming for at 25 yds., you'll easily hit what you are aiming at when the distance is close. The reverse is usually not true. Up close shooting will tell you nothing you need to know but it's good for ego: poor ammo is accurate and we are all highly skilled shooters.

Bullet weight is not of great importance with the .357. The ammo has high velocity and doesn't depend as much on bullet design, etc. as do .38 Special and 9mm ammo. Ammo that you can consistently hit the target with, recover from recoil quickly, and strikes at or close to point of aim is far more important than FBI data, jello and blue jean fabric shooting, "overpenetration", YouTube expert crackerjacks, bullet design, etc.

Few ever mention shooting skill in posts such as this one, perhaps because most of us don't shoot well, but it's more important than all other criteria and is the place to start. Consistently getting the bullet to land in the right spot means more than everything else, but many seem to think all the extraneous gimcrackery makes up for a lack of skill. It doesn't.

 

[SnidelyWhiplash]

It's not just accuracy or bullet design...the differences are probably negligible at best. It's controllability and how fast one can do followup shots. Two quick hits on target can be more effective than one loud blast you have to take time bringing the gun down out of recoil.

 

[cd228]

I figured I'd rekick this beehive. I was in my Speer reloading manual, they had some good data on the 135 grain .357. they used a 2.5" M19 while not the same as the what the OP is referencing It showed supersonic velocities in the 1,000-1,200 fps range vs 7-800 fps range in .38 SPC +p. The .38 +P was out of a 2" model 15. I felt like sharing because both the test guns where classic Smiths.
Unfortunately, Factory loaded 135 rounds remains unobtanium. I'd suggest the OP contact Speer directly to find out when the last run was made and where it went.

 

[BabaBlueJay]

I think any small frame revolver is better served with .38 Special rather than .357. Just because a gun can chamber the round doesn't mean its a good idea.

This. 357 is a bear of a round even out of a 686 snub which is 38 ounces. Out of any air weight, OP is going to find the recoil to cause the exact problem they are going to avoid in slow follow up shots.

If you must go with a carryable 357, the absolute lightest I would recommend is the S&W 327 Performance center. You get 8 shots in a 23 oz gun that is small enough to carry.

 

[John Patrick]

I think the Buffalo Bore 158gr LSWC HP 38spl +P is the way to go.

I carry it in my 2 1/2” and 3” K frames and Colt’s King Cobra too.

 

[BC38]

Not to be a contrarian, but IMO, you are asking the wrong question.

As much as I love my revolvers, it seems to me that a compact 9mm with modern SD ammo is a better solution for concealed carry than any 357 wheel gun.

A Sig P365, or a Hellcat stoked with 9mm +P SD ammo will give you all the performance of a 357 magnum, with 2-3x the round count, in a package the same size (or smaller) than a J-frame.

JMO, and YMMV...

 

[WR Moore]

I've skimmed through this thread and have a few comments.

1. FBI penetration requirements are based on the probability of a round striking a chance barrier-like an arm-before hitting the torso. So, the round has to retain sufficient velocity/integrity to reach vital areas despite this. Based on the Miami incident, they prefer to err on the side of more penetration. Also, the LE approach method is of separate contact and cover officers. The cover officer is generally not directly facing the subject, subject body position tends to require a higher penetration standard.

While everyone seems to be dumping on Even Marshall, he did note that most private citizen self defense situations suggest choices at the lower end of the penetration range would be better. Subject facing citizen.

2. I've been doing chrono testing of ammo through various guns and calculating recoil. Using real world velocities, +P .38 loads will generate 3+ to 4 ft lbs of recoil in a steel J frame snubby. Add about 30% for alloy frame. Assuming the same percentage of short barrel velocity loss in .357, a feather weight .357 firing a 125 gr 357 round will produce about 8.4 ft lbs of recoil. Give or take, about 100% more recoil.

Personally, I'd quit worrying about what the bullet might/might not do and concentrate on shot placement. Quoting a real oldy: "It ain't the arrow, it ain't the bow, it's the Indian". that matters.

3. Testing: Ordnance gelatin is a PITA to use properly and the standard is 10%. The various other testing gels don't really correlate to "official gel" results. The water filled milk jug method does produce results very, very close to that of "official gel". Close enough for government work.

NO SIMULANT TEST PREDICTS REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See bullet placement above.

4. I used to have sources at the Quantico FBI facility that provided me with copies of memos. The development of the standardized ammunition test procedures are quite straight forward. However, you have to choose the test stages that fit your needs to make an informed decision as what may work best for you. A high percentage (at that time) of their incidents suggested that availability of something more than service pistols would have been a good idea.

Having said that, the agency had/has every intention of supporting it's image as the #1 in the country. To that end, at least in public, everyone had to sing from the same sheet of music. I had a copy of one of Mr. Urey's memos where several parts might have been revised upon further consideration.

 

[ruger 22]

This is a great thread. Lots of good suggestions. Even though I carried a BHP for over 40 years I have had a fair exposure to snubbies and can say that looking for a low recoil 357 is looking for something that does not exist---kinda like salt free ham.

 

[Brian Parrish]

This

Confining this to .357 ammo per your post, try at least five or six ammos. Assuming you're a reasonably skilled shooter with .357 ammo in a small, light revolver, try them all at 25 yards. (I know - confrontations only occur at very short distances, etc., etc.) At distance, you'll quickly find what works best and if you can hit what you are aiming for at 25 yds., you'll easily hit what you are aiming at when the distance is close. The reverse is usually not true. Up close shooting will tell you nothing you need to know but it's good for ego: poor ammo is accurate and we are all highly skilled shooters.

Bullet weight is not of great importance with the .357. The ammo has high velocity and doesn't depend as much on bullet design, etc. as do .38 Special and 9mm ammo. Ammo that you can consistently hit the target with, recover from recoil quickly, and strikes at or close to point of aim is far more important than FBI data, jello and blue jean fabric shooting, "overpenetration", YouTube expert crackerjacks, bullet design, etc.

Few ever mention shooting skill in posts such as this one, perhaps because most of us don't shoot well, but it's more important than all other criteria and is the place to start. Consistently getting the bullet to land in the right spot means more than everything else, but many seem to think all the extraneous gimcrackery makes up for a lack of skill. It doesn't.

Jeff Cooper explained why it is that we always speak of gear over skills. He said to accept it and remember it is what keeps the industry going. But thanks for saying this and keep preaching brother!
BrianD

 

[smoothshooter]

Thanks for the response.

The Speer 38 is a perfect example of how inconsistent 38 is out of short barrels. Take a look at the gel tests by both Gun Sam and the "Discreet Defender" guy...in both tests, you had failure to expand. (I can give you links if you'd like.). It is precisely ammo like that has convinced me that 38 is just not the best choice for self defense.

Bullet expansion is not absolutely necessary for self-defense.
I question the viability of shooting .357 Magnum out of a small lightweight handgun for several reasons.
Lead flat nosed wadcutters may be the way to go. They have a pretty good track record, and you will be FAR better at placing your shots in the one in a million chance you would ever. Have to shoot an assailant.
Also, practice sessions will be a lot more pleasant.
BTW, have you ever fired a full-powered .357 in an enclosed space? I have. Dan Wesson revolver with a 6” heavy barrel. It was an accidental discharge. I was not rendered helpless, but it was not a bit fun. Impressive concussion and fire ball. I can only imagine the blast and fireball out of a snub-nosed revolver.