Sufficient energy to kill deer cleanly w/357

[Gryphon Black]

Right. Remember how much more speed you can get from this "revolver" round when you send it down a barrel 3 times longer. As long as you are shooting a nice hot load that you know the gun likes for accuracy, 100yds should be no prob. If you believe Hornady, thier new levo flextip stuff will supposedly kill at 200yds, which I estimate to be 140 yds in actual yards!
I would get a bunch of plastic jugs or buckets, fill 'em with whatever bullet stopping material you believe in, and try shooting them at the ranges in question. See what those bullets actually do. Then once you are sighted in, go shoot some meat!
But then, what the heck do I know, I'm a plinker!

[Old Ironsights]

Most of y'all have seen this, but sometimes it takes a reminder, and the newbies could use the info...

What's left of the shoulder of an 8pt buck shot at 110yds with a 180gr .357 cast bullt moving at a MV of about 1800fps:

It will do the job.

[nemhed]

I weighed in on this thread a long time ago. My opinion really doesn't count for much. Here in Indiana they legalized rifles in pistol calibers for deer. I decided a levergun in 357 would be a great all around rifle for me; I reload for it, it's cheap to plink with, will take small game with carefull shots, it will take larger varmints at medium range (a subjective term), and I've proven to myself it will take deer. I could have purchased a levergun in a larger legal sized (for Indiana) caliber that would have been better on deer but that wouldn't have made it a better rifle for me. I'd like to walk into a gun store and say "I'll take one of everything in the store" but that ain't going to happen for me financially. A 357 will cleanly take deer at reasonable and prudent ranges (a very subjective statement). No matter what you're shooting at and with, you have to decide what the words cleanly, reasonable, and prudent mean. No one's forcing us to go out and hunt, we have to decide on a personal basis what conditions we want to do it under. I for one am completely sold on deer hunting with my 1894 in .357.

[Nath]

Old Irons and nemhed, your spot on
Nath.

[Bullard4075]

Posted before by me awhile back:

Seems like I'm all alone here as a 357 mag hunter. First 10 years of my hunting life Eastern Whitetail fell every year to my Ruger Security Six 6". The Keith load. Lung shots mostly although twice that load shot end to end and exited. Larger,heavier,western deer fall to the lung shot also though the end to end might be chancey. Smith & Wesson 6" Model 27 fills the bill now. Six 44's proves I'm not wedded to the 36 calibure. A 44 doesn't drop deer any faster -as close as I get- but I am much more sure of complete penetration on anything save a broadside lung shot. I haven't seen the advantages of the heavier bullets in 44s either. The 44 Keith load has always worked for me also. Then again Deer is the heaviest game I shoot (so far) with a pistol.

[AJMD429]

People can and do kill deer with a given load from a 4" revolver that they would not use from a 20" barreled rifle. That amazes me . . . What it comes down to is what gives you confidence.

Yep. The 150 yard velocity and energy from a rifle may be better than the 75 yard velocity and energy from a handgun, and nearly all of us are way better at shot placement from the shoulder gun.

The same topic comes up with the .32-20, and here's some interesting comparison . . .

I chronographed a .357 factory load 180 gran (Speer I think) a couple years ago, just to see what it did out of 18" Marlin. I got 1395 fps which is just shy of 800 fpe. RCBS ballistic software projects that out 1200/600, 1175/550 ,1100/475 ,1060/450, and 1030/425 fps/fpe at 75, 100, 150, 175, and 200 yards.
To be "on" at 150 yards, I'd be 7" high at 75 yd, 6" high at 100 yd, 7" low at 175 yd, and 12" low at 200 yd. The reason I included out to 200 yards is that I know some of the deer I might THINK are 150 yards away might be more than that. (Which is why personally I'd not use my .357 past 75 yards.)

Look at a .32-20 load for comparison: I got 2095 fps from 16.3 gr of 296, which is about 1075 fpe. Velocities and energies and trajectories vs. the above are: 1700/620, 1600/550, 1400/430, 1300/380, 1250/340 at 75, 100, 150, 175, & 200 yd., with 2.5" high at 75 yd, 3" high at 100 yd, "on" at 150 yd, 3" low at 175 yd, and only 7" low at 200 yd.

Now the old timers got plenty of deer with the .32-20, and we discussed the differences in hunting style over the years on the other thread, but if you look at just the energies, the .32-20 and .357 aren't that much different in energy at 150 yards, but the .357 'keeps' the energy better farther out with the heavier bullet. OTOH, you have to HIT the deer, and if you look at the trajectory of the .32-20, and consider the potential error in ranging, I'd rather try to hit that deer out at "140 to 170 yards" with a .32-20.

Now, if you want to drive yourself even crazier, consider the fact that "energy" measured as a physicist would, in terms of mass times velocity squared, may equate to potential tissue displacement, but likely does NOT equate to lethality very directly.

IMHO velocity isn't important so much as the imparter of energy, as it is to assure accurate shot placement because you don't have as much drop if you misjudge distance. Especially at sub-sonic velocities, all you're really doing is making a hole, as Hobie said, and WHERE that hole is is the most important thing, with the DIAMETER also important. If the hole goes clear through, all the better - more hemmorhage.

Still, all this pontificating and ballistics is for bad-weather-days; if you just go out and shoot any gun often enough and well enough to HIT whatever you aim at, then you surely can put down a deer at whatever range you are good with that gun, as long as there's enough 'punch' left that your bullet would penetrate a shoulder if it hit there by mistake.

Personally, I'm not confident enough in my .357 skills to shoot a deer past 75 yards, and if the .32-20 were legal here I'd not likely use it much beyond that range, but that is only because I have the options of .44 Mag, .45 Colt, and .454 Casull, which all make big holes, and shoot a reasonably flat trajectory out to 200 yards if you use the right bullet. For any of those I'd be confident to 150 yards, and beyond that I'd want a pointy-bullet gun or a .444 Marlin. Still, the 'old-timers' were not so lucky as to have so many gun choices, and they just used the tools they had. My great grandpa evidently did just fine with his .32-20, although I don't know the ranges used.

[44LVR]

Man I am ever glad I didn't know the .357 was so marginal for deer

Close to 30 years ago I owned a Ruger blackhawk and a Marlin both in 357 and also a Savage 357/20 gauge. First married, man those were some lean years when it came to any new guns. I might not have had many firearms but I had all my reloading and casting equipment from before marriage.

I shot a Lyman 358477 that weighed about 160grs sized and lubed in the Marlin and Savage. In the Marlin I would save and periodically buy some 158gr Speers. With the cast I used 13 grs of 2400 and never knew the velocity. But in the pistol and it took about 50 deer out to 100 yards and in the Savage I can think of about 5 deer I took out to about the same range.

But the Marlin was my 'long range' outfit. A 4X scope made it a nice outfit. 15 grs of 2400 took deer cleanly out to around 150 yards, give or take a few yards. For the life of me I cannot think of a single deer I shot twice. Maybe it's because I lived in the outdoors and was around deer on a regular basis so it was no big deal.

It wasn't until about 10 years later that I moved about 25 miles away into elk country that I realized I needed more oomph since there were few deer and LOTS of elk. So I went to the .44 mag and never looked back. Elk out to 150 yards with the .44 in both rifle and pistols have been no problem.

44

[El Chivo]

I was watching a hunting video and the hunter had the whiz-bang rifle and scope. There were deer all around, but he sat and waited until he had a clean 50 yard shot. If you are going to do that a .357 is as good as anything.

[HiVelocity]

Folks,

You need to check out RanchDogMolds dot com and try RD's
360-190-RF. I have 100 loaded for deer hunting this year (which starts here in SC in 2 weeks).

Just food for thought...........

HiVelocity in SC

[JerryB]

HiVelocity, welcome to the forum. It sounds like you might be another one of us .357 carbine lovers. There are alot of Ranchdog users here too.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

My fallback is a model 71 ...

I almost missed that one. A "Bone Crusher" relegated to fallback duty.

[Birdman]

I bow hunt with a longbow. I know that my shots will be at a shorter distance compared to my son with his compound bow with all the bells and whistles. But, I know what I can do and am willing to hunt within my limits. The same goes for that 357. Know your equipment, and more importantly, know your own limitations and you will be fine.

[Bogie35]

People can and do kill deer with a given load from a 4" revolver that they would not use from a 20" barreled rifle. That amazes me. While the bullet needs to be properly constructed for the velocities, the energy is a small part of the calculation. The main thing is to put a hole of sufficient diameter through the vital organs disrupting operations, i.e. oxygen to the brain. Destroy heart, lungs, brain or remove so much blood there is no way to transport oxygen from the lungs to the brain and you have a dead deer or any other animal. Basic? Yes. But that is all that it takes whether you're using a sharp stick or throwing a metal projectile at the target.

What it comes down to is what gives you confidence.

+1

[Bogie35]

Kinetic Energy is very unreliable in determining a cartridge's ability to kill cleanly. For example, a typical 150gr 270 Win load produces about 2170 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards, while a 350gr 45-70 leaving the muzzle at 1950 fps only produces about 1970 ft/lbs at 100 yards. Is that 270 more deadly at 100 yards than that 45-70? ABSOLUTELY NOT! The Taylor Knock Out formula is far from accurate, but it's much more in tune with reality than Kinetic Energy. The formula is:
bullet diameter X bullet weight X velocity at impact / 7000

Obviously, bullet placement and construction are paramount. A better indication of killing power would have to consider Penetration and Wound Diameter, which basically equal Wound Volume. These days, most rifle bullet designs provide more than adequate penetration, and you only need moderate penetration to reliably perforate a deer's vitals, unless of course you prefer shooting them in the butt. No animal on earth lives an inhumane length of time with perforated vitals. With an extra hole in their butt, yes, but not with perforated vitals. While Penetration determines whether or not the deer will die, the size or Volume of the wound will generally determine how long it will take.

I've developed a formula that considers only Penetration and Wound Volume. Although it is theoretical, it's much more in tune with the realities of hunting that I have experienced and that, according to what I've read and heard, many others have experienced as well.

My penetration formula is: bullet weight / 7000 X velocity at impact X sectional density X 1.5357 = THEORETICAL PENETRATION
My wound volume formula is: (bullet diameter X .5) squared X 3.1416 X PENETRATION = THEORETICAL WOUND VOLUME or "KILLING POWER"

With all that in mind, a typical 158gr 357 Mag factory load has about the same killing power at 100 yards as a 50 cal. ball from a traditional Hawken had at 50 yards. In its day, the old 50 cal. took plenty of deer and elk from 50 yards.

Now that you all think I'm a weirdo with too much time on my hands, you have a very "real world" formula for "killing power".

bogie

[6pt-sika]

Folks,

You need to check out RanchDogMolds dot com and try RD's
360-190-RF. I have 100 loaded for deer hunting this year (which starts here in SC in 2 weeks).

Just food for thought...........

HiVelocity in SC

Ranch Dog has actually come up with a pair of bullets for 35 cals !

The first was the 359-180GC , this one was never entered into production because it was felt that it didn't work that great in the 35 REM . I happen to have this mould and use it in my #2 Marlin 336ER (356 WIN) and it shoots with great results !

More recently he brought out the 359-190GC and although it doesn't do as well in my 356 WIN it does just great in my #2 Marlin 336D (35 REM) .

As far as trying either bullet in the 357 MAG , I already had that covered with a Lyman mould they brought out for the 357 MAX a number of years ago and no longer available . It's the Lyman 358627 this is a 215 grain SWC GC . A friend gave me this mould to use in the 35 REM about 6 years ago ! Never tried it in the 35 Remmies but my 24" barreled Marlin 1894CB in 357 MAG sure likes it . I also have a little Marlin 1894CP that seems pretty satisfied with this 215 grain bullet also , however in the CP I normally prefer to use the Nosler 180 grain Partition bullet .

Anyway at some point in time I would love to take a deer with both these little rifles , but I think I'll keep my shots inside 60 yards

[Paladin]

I'm in aggrement with 86er. To quote Clint Eastwood (I forget which movie), "A man's got to know his limitations" It doesn't matter which legal cartridge or hunting tool you use, whether it's a 338 Lapua Magnum or a 35 lb primative bow, you've got to know what your capabilities and limitations are and work (hunt) within those to be an ethical hunter. Sufficient,efficient, and effective are unfortunately subjective terms. We each have to decide what they mean.

+1

[Old Savage]

Range.