Why is the 357 Magnum so well known?

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I owned a 4" .357 Magnum for a couple years. Great gun but kind of pales in comparison to my 8" Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum. I kind of wish I had kept the .357 though. It's a great gun for a revolver, plenty accurate and pleasant to shoot. It also makes a pretty loud boom at the shooting range.

How much extra energy/velocity does a 8" barrel provide over a 4" (I realize it depends on a lot of things, but in general)?

Anyway, nice chart for a 44 here, but it's for a 4" barrel.

Same site has a 357 chart also for those arguing about energy and velocity.

Beats me, I've never measured it. I know the 8" barrel makes the gun much more pleasant to shoot though. It's also easier to shoot accurately. I didn't buy the 8" for the extra muzzle velocity, I bought it because I've shot short barrel .44 Magnums before and they are a handful and fairly punishing on the wrist.

The .357 Magnum and the .44 Magnum are similar in muzzle velocity the .44 is just pushing a bigger bullet.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

I can't explain it...but

http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?caliber=0

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

Because it isn't just bullet size, it is how much gunpowder and muzzle velocity?

uh, 44 has more gunpowder. unless you are using super hot loads in the 357. as far as velocity, it depends on load again, but if you use a 180 or 200 grain on the 44, then it probably will be faster. I know if I was in bear country, a 357 would not be my first choice.

I think you're taking his post incorrectly. The statement is it has a higher stopping rate, not that it's more powerful.

There are resources which detail actual shootings and the % chance of effective shots (usually a "one shot stop"). These don't take into account placement, distance, etc. generally, just round effectiveness in real world shootings.

i wouldn't trust those sites at all. there's so much that would factor into that that there is no way it can be accurate at all.

It comes from the FBI crime statistics publications

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

Because it isn't just bullet size, it is how much gunpowder and muzzle velocity?

uh, 44 has more gunpowder. unless you are using super hot loads in the 357. as far as velocity, it depends on load again, but if you use a 180 or 200 grain on the 44, then it probably will be faster. I know if I was in bear country, a 357 would not be my first choice.

I think you're taking his post incorrectly. The statement is it has a higher stopping rate, not that it's more powerful.

There are resources which detail actual shootings and the % chance of effective shots (usually a "one shot stop"). These don't take into account placement, distance, etc. generally, just round effectiveness in real world shootings.

i wouldn't trust those sites at all. there's so much that would factor into that that there is no way it can be accurate at all.

It comes from the FBI crime statistics publications

meh

 

[jagec]

It's a hand cannon that has one extra syllable over the .44 Magnum. Maybe if they had a .445 Magnum, that would be even more famous.

 

[Maxspeed996]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

Because it isn't just bullet size, it is how much gunpowder and muzzle velocity?

uh, 44 has more gunpowder. unless you are using super hot loads in the 357. as far as velocity, it depends on load again, but if you use a 180 or 200 grain on the 44, then it probably will be faster. I know if I was in bear country, a 357 would not be my first choice.

It wouldn't even make the top 10. A .44 Magnum would be the minimum I would carry for bear defense.

I'd want at least something like a Heckler and Koch Mp-5

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: jagec
It's a hand cannon that has one extra syllable over the .44 Magnum. Maybe if they had a .445 Magnum, that would be even more famous.

It's 2 more

 

[Kilgor]

Originally posted by: jagec
It's a hand cannon that has one extra syllable over the .44 Magnum. Maybe if they had a .445 Magnum, that would be even more famous.

There is a .445 magnum, it's used mainly for silhouette shooting.

 

[Vic]

The S&W .357 Magnum was the very first handgun to be called "Magnum." That's why.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: jagec
It's a hand cannon that has one extra syllable over the .44 Magnum. Maybe if they had a .445 Magnum, that would be even more famous.

It's 2 more

err, extra letter. Yeah, 2 extra syllables

 

[Slacker]

I have a .357 Magnum 8" barrel, at the range when others are shooting, it definitely stands out as being much louder, it also kicks harder than my .45's

Here is a link with WAY too much info on the .357

 

[Apex]

Does this thread remind anyone else of the Bullet Tooth Tony scene in Snatch? Man, I love that scene.

 

[Iron Woode]

because T.J. Hooker had one?

 

[marvdmartian]

I'm about 99.9% sure that the extra barrel length does nothing to increase or decrease muzzle velocity or energy. What it does do, is to make the slug much more accurate, since it has a longer barrel to travel down. And like JulesMaximus said, it makes it more pleasant to shoot, since it makes the pistol heavier, thus causing it to rise less when fired (and less wrist-snapping possible! ).

I have a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 magnum revolver with an 8" barrel, basically a "cowboy 6-shooter" pistol, that you can easily shoot one-handed, if you can hold the weight steady at the end of your arm. The kick from it when you fire is actually LESS than the kick from my Glock 9mm, even though you're talking 240 grains for the .44, and (usually) only 115 grains for the 9mm. A lot of this has to do with the fact that the Glock is SO much lighter weight, even fully loaded.

Oh, and to your original question, OP, I'm sure it probably has to do with the whole "magnum" mystique. They're much higher energy loads than what was available previously, with a LOT more stopping power......and besides, it sound a lot cooler than saying you have a 10mm handgun! :laugh:

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Maxspeed996

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

Because it isn't just bullet size, it is how much gunpowder and muzzle velocity?

uh, 44 has more gunpowder. unless you are using super hot loads in the 357. as far as velocity, it depends on load again, but if you use a 180 or 200 grain on the 44, then it probably will be faster. I know if I was in bear country, a 357 would not be my first choice.

It wouldn't even make the top 10. A .44 Magnum would be the minimum I would carry for bear defense.

I'd want at least something like a Heckler and Koch Mp-5

Save the last round for yourself. 9mm would be completely ineffective against a large bear.

 

[GarlicBreath]

Sigh...

The idea that the the .357 Magnum is a better one-shot stopper than the .44 Magnum comes from the work of Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow, two former law enforcement officers. Their original book "Handgun Stopping Power" attempted to rate the effectiveness of various handgun rounds/loadings based on actual real world shootings. I don't want to get into it too much here, but let me say that Marhall and Sanow's work has been widely criticized for the authors' apparent complete lack of understanding of statisical and scientific analysis principles. Anyone with even an indroductory education in statistics and scientific methodolgy will immediately see the flaws in their methods.

That being said, the .357 Magnum MAY be a better manstopper than the .44 Magnum, even though the .44 mag has nearly twice the muzzle energy (roughlly 900 ft.-lbs. vs. 500 ft.-lbs.) and much greater weight and cross sectional area. Here's why: overpenetration. The .357 mag, with good hollowpoint bullets, may deposit all of it's 500 ft.-lbs. or so of energy INSIDE the target's body. The .44 mag, with it's heavier bullet, may zip right thru a body before fully expanding, expelling most of it's 900 ft.-lbs. or so down range of the target.

Room for debate certainly exists. Much is changed by differences in powder types/charges and bullets weights/designs. When it comes to stopping power, it's not all about energy.

One last thing: barrel length certainly can affect muzzle velocity. To achieve maximum velocity from a particular load, all the powder must be burned at the exact instant the bullet leaves the barrell. Any shorter, and powder is still burning in the air, just creating more muzzle flash, while the bullet is long gone. Any longer, and the bullet slows down in the barrel due to friction. The type of powder and it's burning speed affects this greatly. Going by memory. a typical 125-grain .357 load gets about 1100 feet-per-second out of a 6-inch barrel. The same load in an 18.5" carbine barrel will go about 1800 fps, result in a huge gain in energy, beacuse energy is mass times velocity squared.

Not all rounds behave the same. The 9mm parabellum, for example, only gains around 100 fps by going from a pistol length barrel to a carbine.

Me? I usually carry a .38 special snubbie. Sometimes a .357 mag SP101.

Valar Morghulis.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: marvdmartian
I'm about 99.9% sure that the extra barrel length does nothing to increase or decrease muzzle velocity or energy.

Given that the gas that escapes from the muzzle after the bullet exits is at a pressure higher than atmospheric (i.e. enough powder), a longer barrel (to a point) will give more time for the pressure of the gas to exert a force on the bullet, hence accelerating it to a higher speed.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

I can't explain it...but

http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?caliber=0

From what that looks like, it's the expansion of the bullet that is causing the more damage, thus stopping the shootee. like the 223, the little 69 grain bullet is whizzing at over 3k fps, hits a soft skin target and virtually explodes, thus the high knock down rate. Now the 357 going at about the same rate as the 44 but more expandable bullet, is going to do more internal damage than the bullet of the 44 mag. The results on a animal such as a bear or hog, would require a deeper penetration, therefore making the 44 the better choice of the two.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because they are among the most powerful stopping rounds. They have a higher effective stopping rate than .44 magnums.

Can you explain why the stopping power on a 357 would be greater than a 44 mag?

I can't explain it...but

http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?caliber=0

From what that looks like, it's the expansion of the bullet that is causing the more damage, thus stopping the shootee. like the 223, the little 69 grain bullet is whizzing at over 3k fps, hits a soft skin target and virtually explodes, thus the high knock down rate. Now the 357 going at about the same rate as the 44 but more expandable bullet, is going to do more internal damage than the bullet of the 44 mag.

If you hit a vital organ, yeah, but if you hit a limb, nothing's going to happen but bleeding.

 

[Soybomb]

I would venture to say mostly becaue its old and it was probably a very popular police caliber weapon for a long time. Remember police haven't all been using automatics for all that long in the grand scheme of things. I suspect many people might remember watching tv shows as kids (well for most of us probably reruns of older shows) where the main characters might have had .357 revolers.

Now as far as "stopping power" I hate the phrase because it implies there's a wounding mechanism related to the bullet other than tissue destruction and its in some way quanitfiable. While we're talking handguns thats just pretty much not true. People are stopped by wounds. The deepest biggest wound in the most important parts of the body wins. The best we can do is shoot the bullets at a tissue simulant and see what the wounding potential of that bullet at that velocity in fact is. Its not perfect, but its a pretty decent guide line. When people talk stopping power they're usually referring to an older book carrying a similar name written by Marshall and Sanow. Its be quite thoroughly debunked by several people although some still cling to it. One good writeup of the debunking is at http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm