.357 Magnum, 9mm +P+, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP?

[sgtdraino]

I'm interested in deciding which of these 4 rounds is best overall for wilderness survival applications. Not best of all rounds, just which is the best of these four.

My inclination is to gravitate towards .357/.38, because it is a common round to acquire, relatively inexpensive, relatively small (so you can carry more ammo), but has some serious target-stopping capabilities, particularly if fired through a carbine. Of course, this is a revolver round, so your firearms choices are basically confined to revolvers and lever-action carbines.

Next I am partial to 9mm +P+, for basically the same reasons as .357/.38. I think I heard +P+ can approach velocities somewhat similar to the .357 (though I'm not positive). Of course this is a semi-auto cartridge, so you'll be confined to handguns and carbines of that type. Quite a bigger variety of brands and styles than with a revolver cartridge, though.

Next comes .40 S&W, which I'm considering both because I own a handgun and carbine in that caliber, and also because I've heard a couple people here on the forum that are partial to it. In my experience, .40 S&W is somewhat costlier and harder to find than .9mm or .357, but perhaps it is becoming cheaper and more common with its wide acceptance by law enforcement. I think last time I was in Wal-mart, I was surprised to see it priced the same as .357.

Last comes .45 ACP, which I include mostly because I have heard a few people on this forum favor this round. I tend not to, mostly because it's a big bullet (can't carry as much), and it's pretty slow (not as much range, not as flat a trajectory). But hey, I could be wrong!

So what do you guys think? I tend to agree that .22lr is probably the best overall survival round, but I feel I should have at least one other serious caliber on-hand for situations that a .22lr is just not likely to handle well.

Your thoughts?

[Sourdough]

I like the reliability of a wheel gun. I also like "not" leaving spent cases behind for those who are employed to solve riddles. So I vote .357 Mag. w/ 200 gr. Hard Cast Corbon Ammo.

The "TOOL" that lives in the right rear pocket of my Carhartt Logger pants is 3" S&W M-60.

[Pal334]

Last comes .45 ACP, which I include mostly because I have heard a few people on this forum favor this round. I tend not to, mostly because it's a big bullet (can't carry as much), and it's pretty slow (not as much range, not as flat a trajectory). But hey, I could be wrong!

I am a .45acp guy. And probably for all the reasons you mention that you do not to favor it. WeightB] = I don't carry more than 10-20 rounds except under extreme conditions. [B]Big Bullet = The bigger the better:). Pretty Slow = As Cooter may agree, you don't have to be fast to be lethal.
I do agree with your 22lr comment, probably would be one of my first choices.

And what a boring world it would be if we all agreed 100% of the time. It would sure limit our ability to learn from each other.;)

[Ole WV Coot]

45 acp. My carry gun. I have and own the others, carried them at times. I like the S&W Mod 60, and the Walther PPK/S 380 but we don't grow anything the 45 won't stop. Kinda like slapping a guy or hitting him with a baseball bat, I like the bat. The mag for mine holds 8 rounds of Federal Personal Defense, works for me at the ranges I would use.

[Leighman]

My vote goes to the .38/.357 for its versatility.

6 rounds of .38 Spl. (SWC non +P) for recoil senstive folks beats a sharp stick any day.

CCI Snake loads from a 4-inch tube will dispatch those slithering critters for the pot (within a realistic range, of course).

.357 115/125 gr. JHP STILL has a proven track record against two-legged critters.

As mentioned, the compatibility with a lever gun never hurts.

Availabilty. Every country store I've ever been to that sells any ammo stocks something in .38/.357.

[Pict]

It is hard to beat the .38/.357 for versatility. My normal carry gun is a Kahr K-9 9mm, but for woods carry I switch to a 2.5 inch Model 19 .357 magnum. With an assortment of ammo it will take everything from small game up to close range (think tree stand range) shots on white tailed deer. They handle shot shells, wad cutters, +P .38 special, or .357 magnum up to 180 grains. Ammo is widely available and the gun will work well for self defense.

Another advantage of the revolver is that you can split the load and manually select what you want to shoot if things change. You can set it up with two target wadcutters in the cylinder and leave it with your SD ammo set to come on line first. That way if you spot a game animal you can simply open the cylinder and bring the wadcutters on line to hunt. In snake country you can leave it with two shotshells set to go off first and the rest either hunting or SD ammo depending on conditions. At night or coming across bear sign you can reload it with all heavy .357 ammo.

One thing I do with mine is to leave it fully loaded with .357 magnum "bear loads" but carry my speedloaders with +P .38 special. I figure if I need to speed load the gun, I'm in a gunfight and would rather have the control of the +P .38s. Mac

[larmus]

personaly i like the .45 myself, i have owned numorous .45's in many makes and models but have always gravitaited towards the 1911 models... just enjoy shooting them over all the rest... good stopping power, good for medium sized to large game if needed... the other calibers mentioned may have better qualities but why shoot twice when you only need to shoot once...

[chiye tanka]

While I love the .40, I've gotta go with the .357 for the woods. Like Hope said, the wheel gun is more reliable and the only company that makes or did make a revolver in .40 is S&W. That there .357 is a jack of all trades and is hard to beat for all around usefulness.

[Pal334]

I have two 1911's (no fancy stuff). They always work, and are comfortable. Even took one to the sand box ( sssh Doug don't tell any one :) ) Always easy to get ammo and is not particular what it / they eat. I agree with Coot, there isn't much around that a good 45acp won't put down or at least wear out . Having said that I see that many have differing opinions and good reasons for their choices.

[FVR]

There is not a box for non of the above.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm...................................

[Leighman]

There is not a box for non of the above.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm...................................

I thought the same thing!

The Glock 20 in 10mm can be versatile as can the 44 spl/mag combo.

[SARKY]

I will have to go with the .357. Stoke it wih a hot hardcast Keih style semi wadcutter and I would have no problem wih going up against a Black Bear nor any of he other game animals on is continent with the exception of Griz, that might be just a tad light for Griz. I have 2 Ruger single action Revolvers, one in chambered in 38-40 with a 10mm cylinder and the other is chambered in 38-40 with a .40 SW cylinder. both are fun gus.

[Tuckahoe]

Given the above choices I would go with the .357/.38 above the others.
I have serious reservations on using the .45 ACP on dangerious animals. While working for the sheriff's office in 2001 I was attacked by a large angry rottweiler that soaked up round after round of 185 gr hollowpoints. In the end the dog had been hit eight times, chest, shoulders 2x, upper front legs, and snout before he backed off. None of the bullets made full penetration. If you believe something is knocked off its feet when hit by a .45 Im sorry it just don't happen that way. I was a tried and true .45 guy until that day. This did motivate the department to switch to a 230gr +p round but at this time there have been no other shootings with the new ammunition.
I like the .44 magnum better than the above besides the fact that it also fits my Marlin 1894 lever action it also does shot shells, shoots .44 specials and full power magnums. Choice of handgun is the S&W 29

[SARKY]

I have to agree that if given the choice , I would prefer the .44 to the .357. No matter which of these 2 calbers you pick the revolver barrel length should be no less than 4 inches. I might also reccomend the .41 magnum, for those of us who reload I also load .41 special and shot shells. I have a Ruger Bisley Hunter 7.5 inch barrel, a Taurus total titanium Tracker 4 inch barrel, and a Marlin 1895Fg all in .41 mag. With that combo I wouldn't be afraid of anything roaming the woods of North America.

[RBB]

I've carried and used all of these calibers on duty, over the years. We now carry the .40 cal, and I like this caliber very much because it has stopping power (dealing with people), the guns have high capacity magazines, and if you shoot at a bad guy, it isn't as likely as some calibers to hit something (or someone) behind the bad guy you are shooting at.

I've shot bears using a Colt .45 ACP - and also using .45 long Colt. Neither of these rounds did the bear in - eight shots with the .45 Colt Auto and five shots with the .45 long Colt. In each case I had to get very close and shoot the bear in the brain box. With the .357 I never had problems like this. I've actually had better luck killing bear with a 9MM than the .45 ACP.

One drive by shooting employing a .357 mag - five of six bullets passed completely through the house being shot at. The sixth bullet was found in the exterior wall - opposite the side of the building where it entered. For penetration - the .357 mag is the best gun of those listed.

For "wilderness" use, there is no question. The .357 mag would be the caliber to have on hand.

[chiangmaimav]

My favorite gun for wilderness back in the states was a Model 66 F-comp from S & W performance center. It was stainless with 3 inch barrel and I used to do same as Pict and loaded it with .357 rounds and carried .38+Ps in speedloader. I never had to shoot a bear with this, or any other gun for that matter, so I can't say how it would work in that situation. By the way, if you like revolvers and 9mm, Ruger used to make 9mm revolvers as I believe did Smith also but I am not sure if they still do.

[doug1980]

I have two 1911's (no fancy stuff). They always work, and are comfortable. Even took one to the sand box ( sssh Doug don't tell any one :) ) Always easy to get ammo and is not particular what it / they eat. I agree with Coot, there isn't much around that a good 45acp won't put down or at least wear out . Having said that I see that many have differing opinions and good reasons for their choices.

How did you manage that. Getting it there is easy but getting it home HOW!? I was issued two switchblade type knives and Navy Customs only let me keep one. Plus the post office would search every crevace of my packages.

Any way back on topic I am currently in the market for something to carry while out. I currently own a 9mm Beretta and a Taurus 9mm but was looking at a Springfield 1911 .45 ACP. I'm not a huge fan of revolvers, but will use this thread as a tool to help me decide. The wife wants me to carry one to stop bears, can't bring myself to tell her no handgun will stop a determind bear. False sense of security I guess.

[crashdive123]

How did you manage that. Getting it there is easy but getting it home HOW!? I was issued two switchblade type knives and Navy Customs only let me keep one. Plus the post office would search every crevace of my packages.

Any way back on topic I am currently in the market for something to carry while out. I currently own a 9mm Beretta and a Taurus 9mm but was looking at a Springfield 1911 .45 ACP. I'm not a huge fan of revolvers, but will use this thread as a tool to help me decide. The wife wants me to carry one to stop bears, can't bring myself to tell her no handgun will stop a determind bear. False sense of security I guess.

Try this thread for some ideas. http://www.wilderness-survival.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2678&highlight=concealed+carry

[Pal334]

How did you manage that. Getting it there is easy but getting it home HOW!? I was issued two switchblade type knives and Navy Customs only let me keep one. Plus the post office would search every crevace of my packages.

Any way back on topic I am currently in the market for something to carry while out. I currently own a 9mm Beretta and a Taurus 9mm but was looking at a Springfield 1911 .45 ACP. I'm not a huge fan of revolvers, but will use this thread as a tool to help me decide. The wife wants me to carry one to stop bears, can't bring myself to tell her no handgun will stop a determind bear. False sense of security I guess.

;)Can't give out all my trade secrets :D. It does help to know the supply NCO and just slip it into the armory pallet . Remember, if ya ain't cheatin, ya ain't trying. In my humble opinion there is nothing better than a basic 1911 and that is based on about 30 years of carry and use. But as you can see there are many knowledgable folks here that have different opinions.

[sgtdraino]

I like the .44 magnum better than the above besides the fact that it also fits my Marlin 1894 lever action it also does shot shells, shoots .44 specials and full power magnums. Choice of handgun is the S&W 29

I have to agree that if given the choice , I would prefer the .44 to the .357.

Ah, I should have included a .44 Magnum option in the poll! I didn't think to, mainly because I don't own any .44 Magnum weapons as of yet. I tend towards .357 more due to (like with .45) the additional size and weight of .44 Magum ammunition. Also, my impression is that .44 is again a fair bit more expensive than the other four rounds mentioned in the poll. Am I wrong?

What about availability? is .44 as easy to acquire as .357/.38?

I think most would agree that .44 Magnum significantly out-performs all of the rounds in this poll, .357 included. Is that performance enough to outweigh all potential disadvantages? (size/weight/cost/availability)

[klkak]

For woods carry I choose my S&W 629 4" with an assortment of loads. For personal defense I choose my Glock 23 with 2 extra hi-cap mag's loaded with any manufactures top end personal defense 180 gr. hollow points. It's not choosy it'll shoot any 180 gr. load. I have Winchester SXT's in it now.

[tsitenha]

Yes, it was not on the list but a S&W 629 in .44Rem mag would be my choice.

Now in Kanata they won't allow us to carry pistols in the bush, unless you qualify and those permits are very specific to where and who can carry them.

[chiangmaimav]

From most of what I have read the .44 magnum is the smallest caliber which is adequate for bear defense. For black bears maybe .357 but grizzlies you need .44 magnum. There is also now the .500 S & W for real stopping power if you don't have to worry about the extra weight. .44 magnum ammo is readily available and for cheaper target ammo use .44 special as they will work in magnum.

[sgtdraino]

From most of what I have read the .44 magnum is the smallest caliber which is adequate for bear defense.

From what I have read, the bear spray is more effective than any handgun for bear defense. So unless I'm planning to hunt and eat bear, dunno if that would be a consideration for my choice of caliber.

[tsitenha]

Well if hunt and eat it a little pepper would help the taste:D:eek:

[crashdive123]

Actually, I believe the best defense against bears is being knowledgeable about them and aware of your surroundings.......kind of like any environment you find yourself in.

[klkak]

From most of what I have read the .44 magnum is the smallest caliber which is adequate for bear defense. For black bears maybe .357 but grizzlies you need .44 magnum. There is also now the .500 S & W for real stopping power if you don't have to worry about the extra weight. .44 magnum ammo is readily available and for cheaper target ammo use .44 special as they will work in magnum.

The only thing that makes the .44 mag suitable for bear protection is the fact that most folks can't handle anything bigger. Pepper spray is by far better for bear protection then any handgun. I have commented on this many times in these forums from first hand experience.

The only thing a hand gun is good for in a bear attack is it allows you to shot the bear while he is on top of you biting your face off. Or, If you get to the point where you can no longer stand the sound of your flesh ripping or you bones being crunched then you can shoot yourself.

Oh and .44 special cost just as much as .44 magnum. It just don't recoil as much.

I have 2 lever action .44 magnum's in my house loaded with .44 special CCI Blazer hollow points. (in case of a zombie attack)

[catfish10101]

If you are already carrying a .22lr anyway, I would go with the biggest round (for greatest stopping power, or biggest hole) I can get. I just bought my first .45 acp, and only shot 2 clips through it, but I like it. I got the Taurus 24/7 PRO SS model. I chose it over the Ruger (which was what I went in there to buy that day) because the mags hold 12 rounds and the ruger mags hold 8. I also bought 200 rounds of FMJ and 20 rounds of Hydrashocks for it. I would have gotten the .50 cal Desert Eagle but didn't want the old lady to use it on me. LOL.

Bears are best avoided by not suprising them and storing your food properly among other things. Shooting a bear may only prove to make it kill you before it dies.

Remember, you have the .22lr for survival hunting and such, you need a "protector" for them cougars or 2 legged snakes, or whatever else is in your area (besides bears, wear bells for them).

[SARKY]

Look I think that the .45 acp is the best there is for the 2 legged predators., but for a survival/hunting senario is is so less than ideal. If it were all I had I wouldn't complain, but if given the choice between a .357 or a .44 and the .45acp there is no choice. The number of bullet options alone limits what you can do with the .45. I can have bullet weights from 110 grains up to 200 grains with the .357 and the .44 gives me bullet weights from 160grains to 265 grains

[chiangmaimav]

I never owned a .44 magnum or have even fired one. I did used to have a Taurus .41 magnum with a short barrel and it had manageable recoil. Even though I did used to travel in bear country in US sometimes I never encountered a bear which was fine by me, si I am no expert on bears. Pepper spray is supposed to be good but best thing is probably not get close enough to bears to need it.

[Sarge47]

There is not a box for non of the above.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm...................................
Same here, I decline to vote.:cool:

[sgtdraino]

Same here, I decline to vote.:cool:

Not really applicable. The question is asking which of the four rounds listed is best. Not best of all rounds everywhere, just best of these four. Unless you think all four of these calibers are equally crappy (or great), then I'd think you'd have an opinion and would be able to vote.

[Sarge47]

Not really applicable. The question is asking which of the four rounds listed is best. Not best of all rounds everywhere, just best of these four. Unless you think all four of these calibers are equally crappy (or great), then I'd think you'd have an opinion and would be able to vote.
Like I said, the answer to your question is "none of the above". I use .22 LR myself! I think it's the best!:cool:

[sgtdraino]

Like I said, the answer to your question is "none of the above". I use .22 LR myself! I think it's the best!:cool:

So, just to clarify, you think that .357 is no better or worse than, say, 9mm when it comes to survival applications?

[Sarge47]

So, just to clarify, you think that .357 is no better or worse than, say, 9mm when it comes to survival applications?
I've never used either one so I have no frame of reference to honestly answer that question. Given the rising cost of center-fire ammunition, I don't for-see buying either weapon in the future. However, for the sake of this discussion, in the highly unlikely event that someone had offered to buy me the pistol of my choice along with all of the ammo I'd ever desire I'd pick the .357 over the 9mm any day of the week & twice on Sunday! The 9mm has less stopping power than the .357, obviously. However, my weapon of choice would probably be a Springfield Arms 1911 .45 ACP simply because I've always liked it & wouldn't mind owning one; & that's the ONLY reason, not because I think it's a superior "Survival" round. I think that you'll get a variety of answers on this as everybody has their favorite. The .40 S&W is favored by Law enforcement since it combines "stopping Power with less penetration, therefore minimalizing the chance of "collateral damage"; like the round going on through the perp & into an innocent bystander. I don't know if that answered your question or not, but I don't see either of the four rounds listed as having any one being superior to the other in a true survival situation. Any one, used properly, should get the job done.:cool:

[crashdive123]

All listed would be welcome in a wilderness survival situation. I own hand guns chambered in each of the calibers listed. For hiking around here I stick with my everyday carry weapon (.40 S&W). My EDC used to be chambered in 9mm. My weapon of choice for hiking in other areas has been different depending on the area. My .44 went with me often. A .45 was the weapon used during my military time. In the situation that you describe, I chose the .357. However, when you describe a wilderness survival situation I've gotta think - how long is it gonna be? A day, a week, a year? If I'm humping around the ammunition for the weapon I have, I would be in the none of the above category. While sometimes the discussions we have on the best or perfect what ever, are entertaining and sometimes informative, IMO, there is no "perfect" weapon, knife or ammunition for every situation. That's why I prefer planning and options.

[primeelite]

I would have to go with the .40 S&W because I can get some stopping power and a few extra rounds. The recoil is very manageable as well but not sure how it would hold up against bears. I think .357 is also a nice round but having only a limited number of shots to hit your target may hurt you if its a life or death situation. I think there are a lot of rounds capable of doing the job it really depends on what you are comfortable with shooting because you may have a .357 but if you are not used to the recoil and can't hurt your target than you might as well be using a .22lr.

[tsitenha]

We are asked to choose a caliber that is listed, why these limits?
The answer is fairly simple: the one you are most accurate with and most likely to carry (if allowed), the one that will do the “job” in your situation.
Like some have already said bear spray/avoidance is more viable than a pistol rd, magnum or not it is still a pistol rd. Deter rather than confront.
That is if bears are your primary concern, not meat gathering.
2 legged kinds is of another matter
Again what you realistically practice with rather than what you wish you had, no one saved their lives by giving his target pneumonia from the air wash of a passing bullet.
Meat gathering, self loaders are great only if used in the proper context. A magazine is just that, a well to hold extra rds, not an excuse for having missed the first and second and third…. times. No Zombie wars here, game will not just sit there waiting for the next shot; usually it will move on at odd angles and accelerating speed. Become the better shot, hunter that you need to be just as fire making, shelter building,…..is important so is firearm competency…
Like any thing else not smoke and mirrors but will stand the test of time.
This post could go one ad infinitum; parameters and ability are not defined properly.

[primeelite]

I guess it does come down to "not the size but how you use it"

[Gray Wolf]

Only because your list is limited, I go with the dual use 357/38.

[klkak]

Ok, I'll get with the program and choose one.........thinking.......hmmm........ok got it.

I'll choose the .357/.38 in a Marlin model 94 trapper carbine.:D

[Ole WV Coot]

I already picked my 45, but with all the mentioning of the 44 mag I gotta say the one I have is a SS Ruger Redhawk with a barrel about as long as my leg. If you are gonna carry something that heavy in a shoulder or chest rig better get in shape. Too much weight all around. Might as well carry a long gun, and forget a belt holster unless you want to tilt to the carry side. I do agree that a 357 is good for mixing ammo as with my Ruger Blackhawk, but can't justify the weight if I carry.

[chiangmaimav]

I used to own a ruger .44 magnum rifle which was great but I don't think they make them anymore.

[crashdive123]

Don't know if it's the one you owned, but Ruger makes the 96/44M. http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/FAFamily?type=Rifle&subtype=Lever%20Action&famlst=37

[A190]

Give me a 158 grain jacketed hollow point in silvertip. I will be happy.

you failed to mention the .38 super.............also excellent round and great man stopping power,,,,,,,,,,,,carried that one for years.

But that wasn't the question. The revolver is a very forgiving weapon and will hit with good accuracy with any round you throw out of it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I just really like the silvertip, and after that the black talon................and after that all the rest.......

[chiangmaimav]

Yes it was a ruger 96/44m. Also owned a Ruger .22 and SP-101, all excellent guns.

[FredKenpo]

Well, this discussion put my mind at ease. I have a .50, a .44 magnum, a .45 (which tends to be my carry gun), but just bought a S&W 340 .357 magnum because it fits in my pocket. Wondered though how the bear that lumbers through where I live in summer might react to it. Sounds like .45 vs. .357 is almost six of one, half a dozen of the other. I do favor big bullets, as you might have guessed.

[crashdive123]

Hey FredKenpo - how about shooting on over to the Introduction section and tell us a bit about yourself. Thanks.

[REAPER]

if you have the right handgun..you wont have a false sense of security. The S & W 500 mag will drop any living thing on this planet and prob a few others. It can be used in many situations due to the differant loads. 275 gn up to the big T REX Thumper , 700gn
and let me tell ya, that T REX thumper is properly named, its more powerful than most rifels, this round has 3660 ft/lbs muzzel energy, 72lbs recoil, 1350 fps,hard cast lead and shoots like butter through 1/4 in metal plate frm 50 yrds

[SARKY]

I prefer the .460 S&W to the .500. shoots flatter so I can reach out and touch something.

[Rick]

I dunno. Where I live the only thing big and bad you have to worry about is standing in the mirror. No bears, no moose. Just wabbits and squirrels. I guess if you limit me to those calibers then I have to go with the .357 for all the reasons the pastor mentioned. I like my .45 and I like my 9mm but it's just really hard to cook up a squirrel that's been hit with a .45. I've learned to just shoot near them and let the sonic boom get 'em.:D

[Fletcher]

357/38 hands down because you will have two choice's or chances
to replenish ammo. Plus a revolver is more reliable.

[sobeit]

For the woods a 357/38 would be the better. If I went with the 45 I would go with a Ruger in 45 Long Colt

[Tactical Tom]

It wasn't on the list but .22LR is my favorite just because with proper shot placement you could take down game up to deer size * ONLY IF IT WAS LIFE OR DEATH * & you can pack alot of ammo & ammo is cheap! But I also like a 9mm pretty much for the same reason.

[wildography]

I would prefer the .38/.357 for many of the reasons listed by others... but wanted to add my "two cents".

For a "short-term" survival situation, any of the listed choices would work well. However, for SHTF and TEOTWAWKI survival situations... reliability and functionality are paramount. There are "wheel-guns" from the 1800s that still perform well.

Ideally, I would prefer to have a .38/.357 revolver (with a variety of different loads - most of which have been listed) and a .22 revolver (with at least 500 rounds - or, if weight/storage/etc is not an issue... as much as I can get).

[sgtdraino]

Bump!

I really wish now that I had included .44 Magnum in this poll. Maybe next time! :D

[lucznik]

I'll throw in my vote for the .357/.38 as best both from the list as well as the best centerfire handgun choice overall because:

There's nothing in North America that can't be stopped by the .357
It's a lot easier to shoot than any caliber starting with a 4 (or larger)
It has versatility written all over it - you can load it with all kinds of different styles, weights, etc. ammo - all at the same time.
It reliably shoots ANY .38 Spcl or .357 Mag ammo, regardless of power level (which can be a problem with automatics)
Ammo is easy and (relatively) cheap to acquire
Generally speaking, high quality, stock revolvers will out shoot similarly high quality, stock pistols.



I would choose to supplement it with a .22LR - also a revolver.

[Ken]

There's nothing in North America that can't be stopped by the .357

You think so, huh?:whistling::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[SARKY]

Even with buffalo bore solids, I wouldn't want to stake my life on stopping a griz or polar bear. Even something like a bison might be a bit much for the .357

[lucznik]

You think so, huh?:whistling::lol::lol::lol::lol: Yes, I do. I've killed many an animal with the .357. I know others who have done the same. Other calibers (44 Mag, 454 Casull, 460 S&W, 500 S&W) may be technically (and debatably) more efficient at the killing, but they do so at the expense of much greater recoil which inhibits good shooting. The fact that they are "better" in respect to power also does not diminish any other caliber's ability to accomplish the same task.

It's like saying a .300 Magnum is "better" than a 7-08 Rem as a moose/bear/elk dispatcher. With correct shot placement the .300 might put the animal down more quickly, but that doesn't alter the fact that many a moose/bear/elk have been quickly and humanely taken with the 7mm. (I've personally killed three elk in the last two years with the 7-08.) And the 7mm is easier to shoot accurately because it doesn't inflict nearly the same flinch-inducing recoil as the .300.

If you can't kill it with a .357, then you simply aren't a very good marksman.

[lucznik]

Even with buffalo bore solids, I wouldn't want to stake my life on stopping a griz or polar bear. Even something like a bison might be a bit much for the .357If you are staking your life on stopping a griz or a polar bear with ANY handgun (or for that matter with something like archery equipment), you are taking a big risk. That doesn't mean it can't be done.

Bison, BTW, really aren't particularly tough to kill. Three of my friends have drawn for them in Wyoming the last few years and none of them have required much to put them down. They are big, no doubt. (My friend who shot one two years ago hired a company to come in and help him get the animal field dressed and lifted into his truck. The weight of the animal after field dressing broke the crane that was being used to lift it into his pickup truck.) Even being big though, they do tend to succumb (to accurate shot placement) pretty quickly.

[endurance]

I used to hand load 650 fps 148gr. full wadcutters in .38 for small game and then used full power .357 loads for big game/self-defense. Three chambers of each with brass cartridges for the .38 and chrome cartridges for .357 so I could turn the chamber to the appropriate round and I was set. Unfortunately I sold my GP-100 in an act of foolishiness about 10-15 years ago, but I'm hoping to pick another one up or something similar.

Also, I don't live in grizzly/bison country. While there's the odd chance of a black bear encounter, after 30+ years in the Colorado back country I have yet to have a problem with them. .357 seems adequate around here, but obviously there's parts of the country that have significantly different threats.

[SARKY]

Endurance, before you jump on another GP-100 check out the Taurus Trackers, pretty much the same size and gives you one more round in the .38/.357. I have no problem with the .357 and black bear.

[Sourdough]

Endurance, before you jump on another GP-100 check out the Taurus Trackers, pretty much the same size and gives you one more round in the .38/.357. I have no problem with the .357 and black bear.


Ditto....I carry a Model 60 3" 95% of the time for farm work, to fetching water, and have regular Bear encounters in the yard. I use tha Cor-Bon 200 Gr. hardcast "MogenGator's".

[endurance]

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm open to all sorts of options, looking toward 6", as I already have a snubnose .38 S&W and a H&K 9mm. If I'm carrying concealed it's going to be one of those two, but if I'm heading into the woods I'd like something more durable with a longer barrel for longer range shots and more versatility. My GP was amazingly accurate for a 4" barrel, but I'd like to have something I could use out to 50 yards if I had to.

[loki]

I think this question is really dependant upon the platform chosen, compact, full size, carbine all have their benefits as well as drawbacks. I have a .357 snub and a compact .45acp of which I normally carry the 45 not because I believe it is a better round or anything it was just my first pistol and the one that I shot the most and I am just comfortable with it. I feel that when I point my weapon I can hit what I am aiming at with it. I have not had this practice with my .357. I actually bought it for a nightstand gun for my wife when I have to work the night shift. Now the thing that I do like about my .357 is that I can load it with snake shot and easily kill snakes if need be and not worry about it not cycling the slide and having feeding problems. So I say carry whatever makes you comfortable. There is no magic round or gun the utility of a firearm comes in conjunction with the comfort level and skill of the user.

[Badawg]

When I carry, it's a Colt Officer's Lightweight in .45ACP. It's my favorite evener 8)... That being said, I don't think it would be particularly useful in the woods(I live in a desert). That's why I voted for the .357/.38. In either case, if I shot a jackrabbit, there wouldn't be much left to eat... so as far as I am concerned neither would be my choice carry pistol for survival in the boonies. For that I have a Colt Woodsman in .22 LR. It's getting old now though.

For my next trick I am buying an NAA Mini Master(long barrel) Combo. I like the capability of both .22 LR and another cylinder loaded with .22Magnum. That gives me 10 rounds pretty quick and the magnum is a decent round. and Long rifle is just great... Best part? It's not a hard gun to hide from wandering eyes when carrying, is very light, and is made in the US.

[John Guano]

I am partial to the S&W Sigma .40 cal myself. I also have the versatility of a Colt 1911 .45 with a Ciener .22 conversion kit. Talk about optioned survival!

[kx250kev]

I've actually had better luck killing bear with a 9MM than the .45 ACP.


In my own penetration tests involving winchester white box FMJ ammo, the 9mm out penetrated .38, .40 and .45 easily punching through three 2x8 boards.:smash:
Personally, I think the 9mm is an amazing and underrated round.

[kx250kev]

I prefer the .460 S&W to the .500. shoots flatter so I can reach out and touch something.

I preferred the .454 Casull, until I shot it once without hearing protection (deer hunting). Yes it is a kill anything round, that could penetrate a massive stump, but after I experienced significant hearing loss in my left ear, and have nonstop ringing, I decided that a large caliber handgun is a bad idea. I also couldn't group 5 quick shots to a paper plate at due to the massive recoil. That wouldn't help if a bear was attacking. I'll stick to my .40 with 17rd mags. :gun_bandana:

[kx250kev]

Yes, I do. I've killed many an animal with the .357. I know others who have done the same. Other calibers (44 Mag, 454 Casull, 460 S&W, 500 S&W) may be technically (and debatably) more efficient at the killing, but they do so at the expense of much greater recoil which inhibits good shooting. The fact that they are "better" in respect to power also does not diminish any other caliber's ability to accomplish the same task.

It's like saying a .300 Magnum is "better" than a 7-08 Rem as a moose/bear/elk dispatcher. With correct shot placement the .300 might put the animal down more quickly, but that doesn't alter the fact that many a moose/bear/elk have been quickly and humanely taken with the 7mm. (I've personally killed three elk in the last two years with the 7-08.) And the 7mm is easier to shoot accurately because it doesn't inflict nearly the same flinch-inducing recoil as the .300.

If you can't kill it with a .357, then you simply aren't a very good marksman.

I agree, the .357 is a great round and gun.:)

[Alpine_Sapper]

For my next trick I am buying an NAA Mini Master(long barrel) Combo. I like the capability of both .22 LR and another cylinder loaded with .22Magnum. That gives me 10 rounds pretty quick and the magnum is a decent round. and Long rifle is just great... Best part? It's not a hard gun to hide from wandering eyes when carrying, is very light, and is made in the US.

Why you gotta do this to me man? Like I don't have ENOUGH stuff to spend money on already...

http://www.randywakeman.com/naa22miniMaster.htm

[SARKY]

In my own penetration tests involving winchester white box FMJ ammo, the 9mm out penetrated .38, .40 and .45 easily punching through three 2x8 boards.:smash:
Personally, I think the 9mm is an amazing and underrated round.

Sorry, but tiny hole in .....tiny hole out. No expansion, no disruption of organs etc. if you are going to kill the animal and not just wond it use anything other than a fmj. especially in a bullet diameter of .35 cal or smaller. With some type of HP bullet the 9 is a good round, again not what i would use for hunting, or a bear stopper.

[kx250kev]

Sorry, but tiny hole in .....tiny hole out. No expansion, no disruption of organs etc. if you are going to kill the animal and not just wond it use anything other than a fmj. especially in a bullet diameter of .35 cal or smaller. With some type of HP bullet the 9 is a good round, again not what i would use for hunting, or a bear stopper.

Sarky, I won't get in a debate over the 9mm round, but I just believe it is underrated. In my personal penetration tests I sufficiently answered my own questions regarding the power of this round. While I wouldn't recommend the 9mm for hunting, I do believe it could easily penetrate a bears skull, or it's heart. For self defense, I do not feel under gunned with the 9. IMHO, shot placement is key.