Which heavy ammo for .357?

[nebmike]

The OP wasnt talking about encounters with 1,000#+ dangerous African game that are known for frequently charging hunters. Thats a whole different ballgame when it comes to ballistics and bullet design.

For animals in the lower-48 (which are RARELY known to charge hunters), if we're indeed talking about "solids", then I would have to say that hard cast bullets with a sharply defined wide meplat profile will probably have the edge in creating more tissue damage and bleeding in the wound, when compared to most FMJ bullets (at the same weight and velocity) which typically have a more rounded profile (even those that are "flat points" or truncated cones).

Of course there are expensive, custom built solid bronze or copper bullets which can be had with the same sharp meplat profile as can be found in more common and far less expensive hard cast bullets -- but the performance inside an animal (given the same caliber, weight and velocity) would be nearly identical.

 

[cp1969]

The OP wasnt talking about encounters with 1,000#+ dangerous African game that are known for frequently charging hunters. Thats a whole different ballgame when it comes to ballistics and bullet design.

The original post mentioned using a .357 on animals up to and including grizzlies. They have been known to charge. Using a .357 for protection against a grizzly is the handgun equivalent of hunting African dangerous game with a rifle. In neither case is an expanding bullet a good choice. That's just my opinion.

 

[nebmike]

The original post mentioned using a .357 on animals up to and including grizzlies. They have been known to charge. Using a .357 for protection against a grizzly is the handgun equivalent of hunting African dangerous game with a rifle. In neither case is an expanding bullet a good choice. That's just my opinion.

The probability is that someone is 'not' going to get a central nervous system hit with a handgun on a charging grizzly (a brain shot would be a possibility - but not probable) no matter what type of ammo they're using. Additionally, the probably of hitting large bones on a 600# bear is pretty low when compared to hitting the other 550# of him.

I dont care about enough penetration to get a through-and-through hit because you're not increasing the amount of bleeding, all you're doing is increasing the number of holes that the same amount of blood can leak outside of the body through (which might be nice if you're trying to track an animal - otherwise its useless). The bleeding is still going to happen internally at the same rate, and blood that leaks inside of the body cavity is just as deadly (if not more so) than that which escapes from it.

Given those factors, and the fact that a "good" 180gr hollow point like a Swift A-Frame or an XTP is sturdy enough to get through any bone that a 180gr cast bullet would, and continue on into the vital organs -- and given the fact that a hollow point is going to do more tissue damage than a cast bullet irregardless of whether or not it hits a bone along the way, my own personal choice (based on a lot of handgun hunting experience) would always be a hollow point over a solid.

Thats just 'my' opinion. I spend a bunch of time in the mountains and I always carry hollow points whether its in a .357mag (which is pretty rare), a 10mm, or even a .454 Casull.

I dont want to poke a skinny hole with little tissue damage from a non-expanding bullet that is 30" deep if I've got the option of poking a much more messy hole with more bleeding that is 20" deep from a good hollow point.

 

[cp1969]

Then why don't they use expanding bullets on dangerous African game? Does your logic not apply in that situation?

 

[nebmike]

Then why don't they use expanding bullets on dangerous African game? Does your logic not apply in that situation?

There is a HUGE difference when you're talking about a 300-600lb relatively easy to kill animal that typically doenst have the propensity of charging you, compared to a 1,200-9,000lb animal that charges more times than it doesnt.

There is a HUGE difference when you're talking a African big-game rifle at somewhere between 5,000-7,500ft-lbs of energy compared to a .357mag at only 10% of that.

 

[nebmike]

Then why don't they use expanding bullets on dangerous African game? Does your logic not apply in that situation?

Take a look at the second paragraph on this page...

Trophy Hunting the Buffalo in South Africa

"With the advent of quality soft-point bullets, many hunters prefer to make their first shot on the [cape] Buffalo with a soft point to prevent over penetration and the chance of wounding other members of the herd."

"Remember, when it comes to shot placement and your selection of rifles and bullets, always trust the judgment of your Professional Hunter."

 

[Sully]

Yeah, I know what a solid is. What I'm saying is that if the lead bullet doesn't expand, doesn't it perform just like one?

It has the CAPABILITY to deform MUCH more...hence preventing penetration

 

[Larry from Bend]

Not ME partner. If all lead slugs were so great, regardless of their Brinnell, they would still be using them on heavy African game instead of SOLIDS. ( And those arent lead solids either) If I lived and traveled in that country Id hand load 180gr FMJ's loaded to the MAX for the extra zip.

I started out using CorBon 300 grain FMJs in my 44 Mag when I first horse packed into the Bob Marshall. They will certainly penetrate but lack the wide meplat of the hardcast WFN bullets which produces wider wound channels. That sharp shouldered, flat frontal area of the lead bullet also doesn't deflect off bone like a FMJ certainly can; the hardcast stays straight on path. At revolver velocities, these bullets are BETTER than FMJs. And no they don't deform. I've dug them out of clay banks -- they show pretty much zero deformation. If I was going to Africa with a REVOLVER (not a rifle) I'd use Hardcasts over FMJs every time: partner.

Incidently, I've seen a Hornady solid (one of the best made) bent like the letter L after being shot out of a .378 Weatherby into a Bison. A lot of the hunters in this part of the country that go after Bison with period rifles like 45-70s, 45-90s and such do so with Hardcasts and they are VERY effective.

 

[badge 851]

I started out using CorBon 300 grain FMJs in my 44 Mag when I first horse packed into the Bob Marshall. They will certainly penetrate but lack the wide meplat of the hardcast WFN bullets which produces wider wound channels. That sharp shouldered, flat frontal area of the lead bullet also doesn't deflect off bone like a FMJ certainly can; the hardcast stays straight on path. At revolver velocities, these bullets are BETTER than FMJs. And no they don't deform. I've dug them out of clay banks -- they show pretty much zero deformation. If I was going to Africa with a REVOLVER (not a rifle) I'd use Hardcasts over FMJs every time: partner.

Incidently, I've seen a Hornady solid (one of the best made) bent like the letter L after being shot out of a .378 Weatherby into a Bison. A lot of the hunters in this part of the country that go after Bison with period rifles like 45-70s, 45-90s and such do so with Hardcasts and they are VERY effective.

You are spot on in your observation. When I am hunting deer & elk in NE Wa state I use a 444 Marlin w/a 335gr HCGC wide meplat bullet. Not because I need for deer or elk, but because there are Grizzlys there. I further carry two 357 Magnum sixguns loaded with hardcast Buffalo Bore® 180gr LFNGC. No FMJ or hollowpoints for this old soldier to use on dangerous game!

 

[Sully]

Originally Posted by Sully
Not ME partner. If all lead slugs were so great, regardless of their Brinnell, they would still be using them on heavy African game instead of SOLIDS. ( And those arent lead solids either) ...

I'll stand by that posting because its FACT. Even the "soft points" used on the dark continent are basically solids with a tiny tip of lead exposed.

 

[A10]

It's good to stand by your beliefs, Sully. Check out Garrett Cartridges Inc. 44 mag .45-70 .44 ammo ammunition bullets african hunting cartridges, you might be able to get some more information on cast bullets. Technology has changed a bit.

 

[cp1969]

There is a HUGE difference when you're talking about a 300-600lb relatively easy to kill animal that typically doenst have the propensity of charging you, compared to a 1,200-9,000lb animal that charges more times than it doesnt.

There is a HUGE difference when you're talking a African big-game rifle at somewhere between 5,000-7,500ft-lbs of energy compared to a .357mag at only 10% of that.

When did a grizzly become a 300-600 lb 'relatively easy to kill animal that 'rarely charges'? If it doesn't charge, no shot is fired; end of discussion. What the OP wanted to know is what .357 load to use for protection against the one that DOES charge.

Kinetic energy isn't a very good way to determine caliber effectiveness, but let's go with it anyway.

A very hot .357 can generate on the order of 782 ft-lb. Let's say the grizzly weighs 782 lbs; that means we have 1 ft-lb of kinetic energy for each pound of bear.

A .458 Winchester can develop 5,000 ft-lb of KE. So if I shoot a 5,000 lb African animal with it, I have exactly the same ratio of kinetic energy to animal weight.

I will bet my last dollar that a 99 out of 100 people taking on a 5,000 lb African animal with a .458 will be doing it with a solid because penetration is valued more highly than expansion.

So why would I deviate from that if I'm depending on a .357 against a big bear?

I'm not trying to convert anybody. To each his own. I'm trying to show the reasoning that has led me to conclude that a non-expanding bullet, whether it is hard cast lead or jacketed is the top choice for North American dangerous game, whether that bullet is fired from a rifle or a pistol.

 

[nebmike]

When did a grizzly become a 300-600 lb 'relatively easy to kill animal that 'rarely charges'? If it doesn't charge, no shot is fired; end of discussion. What the OP wanted to know is what .357 load to use for protection against the one that DOES charge.

You completely missed the point.

Kinetic energy isn't a very good way to determine caliber effectiveness, but let's go with it anyway.

A very hot .357 can generate on the order of 782 ft-lb. Let's say the grizzly weighs 782 lbs; that means we have 1 ft-lb of kinetic energy for each pound of bear.

A .458 Winchester can develop 5,000 ft-lb of KE. So if I shoot a 5,000 lb African animal with it, I have exactly the same ratio of kinetic energy to animal weight.

Not a valid analogy because you're not spreading that energy throughout the entire animal, you are dramatically concentrating it into the tissues that immediately surround the wound channel.

I will bet my last dollar that a 99 out of 100 people taking on a 5,000 lb African animal with a .458 will be doing it with a solid because penetration is valued more highly than expansion.

Thats what I already said - and again, we're talking about North American animals, not 5,000lb hippos.

So why would I deviate from that if I'm depending on a .357 against a big bear?

For exactly the same reason that the wiser course is to use hollow points on people rather than solids/FMJ's. Whats this you say... people arent like bears? Well, bears are NOTHING like cape buffalo, hippo's and elephants.

I'm trying to show the reasoning that has led me to conclude that a non-expanding bullet, whether it is hard cast lead or jacketed is the top choice for North American dangerous game, whether that bullet is fired from a rifle or a pistol.

You can use reasoning, but I am coming at this conversation with 25 years of handgun hunting experience (which began with a FIRM belief in hard cast bullets). I am a convert based on many, many personal experiences using all sorts of bullets.

...........

 

[cp1969]

I don't think I missed the point.

It's a perfect analogy because we aren't spreading the energy around in either animal. Tissue damage never 'stopped' any animal unless it was a blown-to-smithereens prairie dog.

I didn't say it was wiser to use hollowpoints on people. But if I need to stop one, I have complete confidence in the properly placed lead semiwadcutter. If I place it, it will work. If I don't, a JHP isn't going to make any difference.

Finally, I'd been hunting with handguns for 15 years before you got started, if total years of experience is important, which I don't think it is. How many animals you've shot or seen shot with various handgun ammo is probably a better measure. For all I know, you've shot more animals than I have even though I had a 15 year head start.

Back in the '70s, a friend's father had a large hog farm. Occasionally old sows and boars would get sick and need to be disposed of, so we were able to conduct our own 'La Garde' type tests, on live animals. We tried lots of different rifle and handgun calibers on those hogs, some of which were HUGE, in the 600-800 pound range. We shot them with all kinds of different calibers from all kinds of different angles and all kinds of different ranges. Even a feeder pig under 150 lbs can suffer a horrific amount of tissue damage and still carry on, at least for a while. Other animals are no different.

From that, we concluded that, for handguns anyway, no jacketed bullet measurably improved the performance of a lead semiwadcutter or flat point round nose bullet. In fact, some jacketed bullets showed worse performance due to too rapid expansion. (Tip: .45-70 worked better than anything else we tried.) Admittedly, that was almost 40 years ago and jacketed bullets have improved considerably since then. Lead bullets have not changed, but they worked then and they'll work now.

We can parse each other's comments for days and neither of us will convince the other but the good thing is, we've laid out both sides of the argument for other people to read and help them make their decisions as to what bullet to use. I do want to let you know, nebmike, that I have read lots of your posts and have thoroughly enjoyed them. So far, I think this is the only one in which I've found reason to disagree. You make excellent points and have lots of experience to back them up, so I have the highest respect for you even if you and I don't see things the same way.

 

[nebmike]

We can parse each other's comments for days and neither of us will convince the other but the good thing is, we've laid out both sides of the argument for other people to read and help them make their decisions as to what bullet to use. I do want to let you know, nebmike, that I have read lots of your posts and have thoroughly enjoyed them. So far, I think this is the only one in which I've found reason to disagree. You make excellent points and have lots of experience to back them up, so I have the highest respect for you even if you and I don't see things the same way.

Agreed. I hope y'all enjoy the banter as much as I do. After all, what else do I have to do on a Friday night (except to watch the Kennedy "magic bullet" episode currently playing on the Military Channel). LOL

To be clear, I never said (nor do I feel that) a hard cast bullet is a 'bad' choice... and if its what I had to carry it wouldnt cause me any more anxiety while treking in the woods. Simply put, my personal experiences and observations have apparently been counter to that of some. Maybe its sample number, maybe its shot placement, maybe its the size/weight/attitude of the animals being shot, maybe its the special voodoo that I put into each of my handloads... but whatever it is, it has led me to be very comfortable in choosing an appropriate hollow point (not just any hollow point) over any non-expanding bullet option for emergency use in common caliber handguns against anything in the lower 48 that decided it wanted to try and make a meal out of me or a friend/family member.

Now... where did I put that liquid Mercury???

 

[Larry from Bend]

Agreed. I hope y'all enjoy the banter as much as I do. After all, what else do I have to do on a Friday night (except to watch the Kennedy "magic bullet" episode currently playing on the Military Channel). LOL

To be clear, I never said (nor do I feel that) a hard cast bullet is a 'bad' choice... and if its what I had to carry it wouldnt cause me any more anxiety while treking in the woods. Simply put, my personal experiences and observations have apparently been counter to that of some. Maybe its sample number, maybe its shot placement, maybe its the size/weight/attitude of the animals being shot, maybe its the special voodoo that I put into each of my handloads... but whatever it is, it has led me to be very comfortable in choosing an appropriate hollow point (not just any hollow point) over any non-expanding bullet option for emergency use in common caliber handguns against anything in the lower 48 that decided it wanted to try and make a meal out of me or a friend/family member.

Now... where did I put that liquid Mercury???

Good discussion. Hope the OP got some helpful info. You're new here. Wait 'til you run into Gun4Fun. The last time we got into this subject he proceeded to tell me how wrong I was to recommend a 240 grain XTP for use on BLACK BEAR WITH A 44 MAG. That's Black not Griz and 44 Mag not .357!! You see, according to him, all animals should be shot with 300 grain Hardcasts. PERIOD!! He further told me that all hunting guides agree with him and that he once lived in Alaska.
HEY, GUN4FUN, where the heck are you???? ----- and where's my popcorn???