Hello, /k/
My inquiry, as the title suggests, regards innawoods carry, specifically on the North American continent. How does the .357 fare against some of the more dangerous fauna in the area? Would it be adequately viable to carry a 9mm pistol or 1911, or should it be upgraded to the venerable .44?
>>30480759
It would be especially useful if anybody has personal experience against large game with these calibers.
>>30480759
Bump you faggots
Depends on the type of threats you're going to run into.
If you're expecting grizzlies then you'd probably better off with .44 magnum.
>>30480968
What about things that aren't grizzlies? Say, blacks, and mountain lions?
>>30481028
.357 is generally regarded as acceptable for those sorts of targets. Though I have not yet had to defend myself from big fauna so take this with a grain of salt.
Assuming you don't intend to also CC this gun, a bad idea in the first place, I'd go with the .44 just to be safe. You can still shoot .44 special at the range.
>>30480759
If you're talking bear, then it's pretty much useless - you're better off with a magfed 10mm due to more rounds and faster reloading.
If it's against humans, same thing
If ALL you're worried about i bears, bring bearspray and a .454 Casull or .500S&W. .357 is pretty weak
>>30481058
I should caveat. HOT .357 is usually seen as sufficient.
>>30481028
For blacks honestly a .32acp has a pretty good track record killing them, but a 9mm can do it in one shot, even from a PF9
Get a Glock 10mm.
It shoots an equally heavy bullet the same fps.
You get twice the capacity and quicker reloads.
you don't have to worry about escaping gasses burning your hands.
>>30480968
Considering back in the 50's, a guy killed a record size polar bear with a model 27, I think it's a fine round. Buffalo bore makes a good hard cast lead 180gr round that I use for my innawoods ammo. Their website says something about it going about 1400fps with a little under 800ftlbs at the muzzle with a 4 inch revolver. If you handload, you can do better with a 158gr jacketed bullet and the right powder
yes
>>30481151
Nah nah nah mah negah.
Y'all needs a 40 meemeter glawck problem solver mah negah
>>30481028
>Say, blacks, and mountain lions? And what about black bears?
What about my sp101 2.25" with buffalobore 180grn hardcasts? Obviously shorter barrel = lower velocity. But about to move to an area which has the occaisional mountain lion or blackbear. Obviously not a grizzly stopper but would that be sufficient in defense against these critters? My sp101 is my EDC
>>30481172
>Get a Glock 10mm.
>
>It shoots an equally heavy bullet the same fps.
>
>You get twice the capacity and quicker reloads.
>
>you don't have to worry about escaping gasses burning your hands.
Came here to post this.
>>30481548
You're not going to get 800ftlbs out of a 4" 357
>>30480759
If you're a good shot with a double action .357 you should be fine.
Felling a charging bear or moose, like most large mammal hunting, will always be about shot placement.
A .357 with some hot loads will have more than enough penetration to strike a kill by disabling the CNS of a bear or moose.
I ran into a moose a few weeks back while hiking with a buddy. All I had on me was 6 rounds of 9mm in my Kahr CM9. We were about 25 FEET away from the guy, and he was huge.
I recently picked this guy up, a 5 shot .44 magnum with a 4" barrel. It is a Taurus, but that is all I could afford. I plan on open carrying it when hiking. I've got some wood grips coming for it.
The bottom line is if you're going to be hiking or bushwacking in bear country, with the chance of running into moose or cougars, you would be well served by practicing your double action revolver shooting a carrying a .44 magnum.
>>30482080
Better than nothing. Worse than .40S&W.
See: http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
They didn't shoot any 180 grain loadings, but if the 158 grain loading was 914 out of a 2" barrel and 1122 out of a 3" barrel, and given that the 180 grain bullet will be moving more slowly, I'm estimating it would be traveling anywhere from 825-900 fps out of the 2.25" barrel, which is still good for penetrating a wild animal's thick hide, but the reality is that a S&W Shield in .40 would give you slightly faster muzzle velocity with the same weight bullet, and two extra shots.
I honestly don't know why people still carry revolvers in this day and age.
>>30482148
Looking at this website it seems that with a 10mm you're hard pressed to get over 750 ft lbs
http://www.ballistics101.com/10mm.php
Looking at hot loads for Corbon and Buffalo bore it is clear that a .44 magnum is going to deliver at least 1.5x the energy of a 10mm.
http://www.ballistics101.com/44_magnum.php
Here is a video of Miculek emptying 6 rounds of .44 magnum in less than one second on target.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7W-5QE3jzw
>>30482280
I'm not sure what you think your point is, avatarfag. Did anyone ever doubt that .44 magnum is in a totally different class than 10mm or .357 magnum? Duh. Of course .44 magnum is more powerful than 10mm. The rest of us all already knew that.
What anon said in >>30481172 and I repeated, is that 10mm and .357 magnum are basically in the same power class, and given that fact, the gun that holds more bullets and is faster to reload would have an objective advantage. The topic of the thread is .357 magnum. Don't believe me? Read the actual OP of the thread!
>Here is a video of Miculek emptying 6 rounds of .44 magnum in less than one second on target.
Good for him. Now post a video of YOU or any other normal human being doing that.
>>30482240
A charging bear or moose isn't a gun fight. You want as much power as you can get in each shot. Revolvers actions can take longer magnum ammunition than most semi-autos.
Miculek is absolutely the man. Listen to him in that video I linked. The smile on that man's face is something else.
"Get Some!.... Wow, I like that"
>>30482369
Please try to pay attention a little better to the topic of conversation. Adults are trying to have a discussion here.
>>30481128
This in Montana we have no issues with a hot 357 and a hard cast load for hiking.
>>30481172
Today on /k/ i learned that 10mm and .357mag are approximately equal
So wait, if a .357 magnum isn't good for game, it's not good for self defense, and it's not even good against human targets, what is the point of it?
Should I sell my S&W 686+ if it can't even stop a person after 7 .357s dead center?
>>30482335
>Would it be adequately viable to carry a 9mm pistol or 1911, or should it be upgraded to the venerable .44?
>>30482335
From the OP, he clearly asked if he should consider .44 magnum.
My point was that .44 is obviously a much more powerful round, and that it can be fired fast if you train for it. The topic of the thread is round viability for self defense in the woods. When it comes to that, bigger is better.
I'm sorry that my tripping triggers you so much.
>>30482385
>The "kid" meme
Look man, in the OP he asks if he should upgrade to .44 magnum. I think he should, and I'm voicing my opinion, while linking videos and websites which support my claim.
>>30482461
.357, like 10mm, is perfectly adequate for hunting and self defense against humans.
For self defense against a bear, moose, or cougar, you want the most power you can get in a single shot, because you may only have a single shot.
I found this fantastically written account of a bear attack:
https://thegreatwhitehunter.wordpress.com/the-longest-minute-terrifying-bear-attack/
>>30482526
What OP said: "Let's talk about .357 magnum."
What you heard: "Hyuck! FORTY FOUR MAGNUM! LOL! YAY! :D"
>>30482526
>For self defense against a bear, moose, or cougar, you want the most power you can get in a single shot, because you may only have a single shot.
Pic unrelated?
But Jerry Miculek sure does smile sumpin else, don't he?
Fucking idiot.
And stop posting fucking avatars with every post.
>>30482461
Don't listen to the tripidiot. He's got a severe case of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
>>30482576
>What OP said: "Let's talk about .357 magnum."
>What you heard: "Hyuck! FORTY FOUR MAGNUM! LOL! YAY! :D"
But... this is literally what OP said
>Is the .357 magnum sufficient for bears or should I go up to a .44 magnum?
And the tripfag was responding accordingly.
>>30481076
>.357 is pretty weak against humans
how does it feel to have an opinion discarded so hard?
>>30482595
Imagine if I started a thread on /o/ about four wheel drive SUVs. I'm looking at Jeeps and I want to talk about Jeeps. I know a fair amount about their performance off road, but am not sure how a Wrangler would handle on the highway, doing a long drive. I'm concerned that the wheelbase is too short for good stability at highway speeds over long periods. Is the Jeep still a viable option on the highways or should I upgrade to something longer like the Chevy Tahoe?
Is this thread about Jeeps or is it about Chevrolets? If you read at a 2nd grade reading level or higher, you should be able to answer this.
>>30482645
Do you need glasses or is your reading comprehension actually that bad?
>>30482461
No
.357 kills everything just fine
theres been a lot of 10mm shilling (aka glock shilling) recently on /k/, not sure why. Even though I love 10mm, there arent enough manufacturers that make 10mm guns or 10mm rounds. .357 is super common and cheaper, but I agree 10mm is close enough to match it.
>>30482576
>What OP said: "Let's talk about .357 magnum."
>What you heard: "Hyuck! FORTY FOUR MAGNUM! LOL! YAY! :D"
You, sir, are a fucking idiot who can't read.
To answer the OP:
Yes, the .357 magnum is a fine, flexible cartridge. With the proper loads and proper shot placement, it is fine against any North American critter.
If you have valid concerns about Kodiaks, then you should look at a real firearm, such as a .44 magnum lever-action carbine. But such an encounter is VERY UNLIKELY, and a pistol is much more packable.
I seriously doubt you have real concerns about Kodiaks.
The .357 will also happily graze on .38 special, for practice with the firearm. Remember, the long-term expense of a firearm is ALWAYS the ammo, so the ability to shoot cheap, common stuff is a big boon.
I own a .357 magnum revolver, and can attest it is very mild and comfortable with .38 special, and can indeed accept seriously fire-breathing loads as well.
10mm looks good on paper. As a matter of practicality, not so much.
>>30482739
That post was made in the context of the confused tripidiot shilling .44 magnum. As for why 10mm is "shilled" a lot on /k/, that should be pretty clear if you actually read the threads. More capacity and faster reloads with no loss of power.
>there arent enough manufacturers that make 10mm guns
You only need one.
>or 10mm rounds
You'd be surprised at how this round has made a comeback over even the past four years. Sellier and Beloit have a practice loading that I've seen on SG Ammo's website for $14.95. PPU and Armscor also have inexpensive ($17-18) practice ammo available pretty widely. Most surprisingly, Sig Sauer's FMJ loading of the caliber is actually a "full power" 180 grain 1250 fps load, and sells for $20-25 a box online.
>.357 is super common and cheaper
It's pretty common, but it's not really cheaper.
>>30482828
I can read just fine, Cleetus. The topic of the thread is .357 magnum, not .44 magnum.
>>30482576
Dude fuck you, and read the OP:
>>30480759
>Would it be adequately viable to carry a 9mm pistol or 1911, or should it be upgraded to the venerable .44?
He literally asked if he should upgrade to .44
>>30482576
I have no doubt that .357 or 10mm can put down a bear. I claim though that if you're truly concerned about self defense you might as well upgrade to .44 magnum since who knows how many shots you get off.
>Stop posting avatars with every post.
Just contributing. This is an image board after all.
>Dunning Kruger
>Implying that .44 magnum isn't objectively superior round for round to .357 or 10mm for actually killing a charging bear.
>>30482595
Thanks man.
>>30482653
It is primarily about jeeps, but it wouldn't be out of the question to start discussing the benefits of a longer wheel base vehicle for towing and stability.
I swear to god you guys are just triggered because I'm tripping. Jesus, you can do it to you know. You don't need mommy's permission.
To the OP.
If you're restricting yourself to .357 revolvers, or an 10mm autoloader, I would go with the 10mm because as this thread has shown, round for round .357 is similar to 10mm.
If you're serious about bear defense, and are open to carrying a larger caliber, then I would consider a .44 magnum.
Since in your OP you specifically asked if you should upgrade to a .44 magnum over a 9mm or a .45, I feel that it is fair that I recommend you do so.
living in Colorado I've seen more adolescent black bear than I can count, as well as several sows and cubs. I've seen two moose, one very recently and up close. I didn't feel comfortable with my 9mm, so I bought a .44 magnum. My claim to .44 magnum superiority is not entirely unbaised, but it is not entirely baseless either.
.44 magnum is simply the more energetic round. Reading my link from earlier you might understand why I think bigger is better.
https://thegreatwhitehunter.wordpress.com/the-longest-minute-terrifying-bear-attack/
>>30482653
OP here, I'm perfectly happy with talking about .44
Yes, .357 is the primary focus of the thread, but, if people do not think it is adequate, then they are free to suggest other cartridges.
>>30482846
>He literally asked if he should upgrade to .44
You're literally willing to take a single sentence out of context and totally ignore the fact that the actual title of the thread is about .357 magnum.
>. I claim though that if you're truly concerned about self defense you might as well upgrade to .44 magnum since who knows how many shots you get off.
Great! Fuddlore. Got anything worthwhile to contribute, though?
>Just contributing. This is an image board after all.
Hyuck, hyuck. Tell it to the mods, faglord.
>>30482461
>what is the point of it?
The point is, it's an awesome round. Have you ever read how the .357 was developed, and why?
Does the name Elmer Keith mean anything to you?
>>30482844
>I can read just fine, Cleetus. The topic of the thread is .357 magnum, not .44 magnum.
Why yes, it is, which is what my post addressed.
You are still an idiot with reading comprehension issues who is now backpedaling furiously.
It's ok, anon, nobody knows who you are.
>>30482896
I love shooting my S&W 686+ but if it's not even good enough for self defense (its primary purpose) then I have no reason to keep the gun.
>>30482883
>Yes, .357 is the primary focus of the thread, but, if people do not think it is adequate, then they are free to suggest other cartridges.
The .357 is completely adequate for self defense against any creature walking the American continents, IF you have the proper loads and competent shot placement.
That said, in the very unlikely event you are going to run into a Big Bear, then you should be carrying a real firearm, not a pistol. A lever-action carbine in .44 magnum is a fine choice, and you can get a carbine in much larger chamberings if you're paranoid.
Are you ever likely to run into a polar bear, anon? Be serious.
If not, the .357 is just fine. Hell, if you've got a steady hand on the trigger, the .357 is fine against the big boys, too.
>>30482954
>if it's not even good enough for self defense (its primary purpose) then I have no reason to keep the gun.
Anon, I'm going to assume you're not trolling, and simply don't know.
Years ago, a couple of guys named Marshall and Sanow published a book, in which they tallied up actual shootings that happened in real life.
No bullshit, no computer models, real people fucking shot.
The .357 125 grain hollowpoint is FUCKING LETHAL. If you do your job and put it center of body mass, it's got a 93 to 96 percent chance of stopping the guy instantly.
It does not get any better than that.
http://handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=5&Weight=All
So, yeah, obviously it's awesome. There's a reason it has the reputation it does.
I have a Ruger SS .357, a Ruger Alaskan in .454 casull, and a Glock 29 (10mm). I go in the woods a lot and carry my 10mm.
>>30482954
It is good enough for self defense. A 686+ is the next pistol I want to get, I have perfectly adequate cc options for two-legged threats, but I want one for carrying while hiking. 7 rounds puts you very close to 1911 capacity, with a generally more powerful round.
>>30482836
Please stop insulting my intelligence. You have no idea who I am, or how smart of an individual I may or may not be.
>>30482844
The topic of the thread is handgun ammunition for self defense in the woods. The OP does not specifically exclude .44 magnum, and in fact he goes as far as to call it "venerable" and say:
>Would it be adequately viable to carry a 9mm pistol or 1911, or should it be upgraded to the venerable .44?
OP introduced .44 magnum into the discussion.
>>30483077
>looks at pic
I am intensely jealous of that rifle.
>>30483077
>Please stop insulting my intelligence. You have no idea who I am, or how smart of an individual I may or may not be.
I judge a tripfag not by the cancerousness of his triphandle, but by the content of his posts. All your posts have been utter drivel. I don't care if you have 10,000+ posts on some gun forum. On here, you're just another fag, until you prove otherwise, which you have not.
>>30482883
.357 sig
12ga 3" magnum slug or a 3006 would be my recommendation OP
if you hit something with either of those, they're going to know it.
>>30482883
It is adequate, but if you haven't bought the gun yet, and you're going to be carrying to bear defense, NOT hunting, you should consider going bigger.
Remember, a hunting situation will be very different than a true self defense situation. I've had several encounters with large mammals in the wild. Most of the time, you see them when they're pretty far off, but I've been startled by both moose and bear before. In the case that you're startled, you may not have time to magdump. Please read the link I posted earlier in the thread containing the story of a grizzly attack in Alaska.
To reiterate, 9mm is adequate to kill a bear, with a hot load of FMJ and superior shot placement.
In my opinion self defense isn't about adequacy though.
I'll tell my story again.
A couple of weeks ago I was hiking with a friend on the east side of the continental divide about 45 miles north-west of Denver. Before we knew what was going on, we realized there was a bull moose with an early summer rack less than 10 yards away. His hair was up like a cat. We backed the fuck up as calmly and speedily as we could.
At the time all I had on me was my Kahr CM9. If he had chosen to charge, I'm not sure If I would would have been able to get off more than a shot or two, so the whole "mag-dumping" theory is out the window.
I recently Bought a Taurus Tracker, because it was the cheapest .44 magnum handgun that I could get my hands on.
But of course this is just my experience, and my opinion. You should consider other options.
>>30482889
Okay.jpeg
>Some guys just always have to be right.
>>30482997
>Hell, if you've got a steady hand on the trigger, the .357 is fine against the big boys, too.
This a million times. Shot placement is so critical with big animals.
>>30483063
If you knew that you would be facing a bear would you take the 10mm or the Ruger Alaskan?
Just curious. Nice guns man.
>>30480759
A 357 should be just fine to take down anything up to a bear.
>>30483101
Thanks dude. It is a decent innawoods gun, except it scares normies.
>>30483127
>Until you prove otherwise.
No.
>>30483184
12ga slug and .30-06 are considered the best long arm chambering for bears.
With large animals you want penetration, and shot placement. Shot placement is critical regardless of caliber, and .44 magnum simply penetrates more reliably through bone and flesh than 9mm, 10mm, or .45
Las summer I was making my way around a switchback at the end of a ridge. This was at around 8500 ft so the tree cover was decently thick. The trail was an old forest service road, that had gone out of use after some private land had been purchased closing off the road. Upon rounding the switchback to the other side of the ridge I came up a black bear sow and cub moving across the road down the ridge. They were about 25 yards of and luckily didn't give a second glance.
When hiking, animals can and will take you by surprise. When that oh-shit moment hits, you're going to want something that is more than adequate.
It all depends on the probability that you're dealing with. If I were hiking around Alaska then I would certainly be carrying a long arm, simply because their easier to aim and shoot accurately.
Since I'm in the Rockies, and have to bear in mind that I share the woods with other people, I chose to stick with a handgun.
>>30483254
What's the spec/build on that thing?
>>30483416
>best long arm for bears
>not 45-70
Generations of Alaskans cannot be wrong my man.
...but of course both the rounds you posted will likely get the job done.
>>30483458
I'm sorry I really shouldn't have said best.
45-70 is almost definitely better than 12ga slug or .30-06. 12ga and .30-06 just readily came to mind.
>>30483455
Sorry this really should be for /arg/
10.5" 5.56 upper, a Shockwave Blade brace with a SST1 cheek saddle on top. Those are the defining items.
>>30483254
>If you knew that you would be facing a bear would you take the 10mm or the Ruger Alaskan?
I do face bears and I would rather have my 10mm.
>>30483458
>>>30483416
>>best long arm for bears
>>not 45-70
>Generations of Alaskans cannot be wrong my man.
>...but of course both the rounds you posted will likely get the job done.
A lever-action carbine in .44 magnum is adequate, but that same lever action in 45-70 means you can walk without fear anywhere in the world.
Pic related.
I've been holding off buying firearms for a while, but maaaaan, I want.
>>30483581
Awesome picture. OP should take note.
Just because I'm curious what is your reasoning for taking the 10mm over the Alaskan?
>>30483581
So I'm reading through this forum thread:
http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/showthread.php/109570-Alaska-Guides-carrying-10mm-for-Bear-Defence-Sidearm/page6
Now I'm seriously reconsidering the tradeoffs between a semi-auto and a revolver. Obviously revolvers can handle hotter and longer chamberings but a lot of the guys on this forum are speaking about the importance of follow up shots, something a semi-auto clearly excels at.
I might have jumped on the Taurus Tracker a little too quick. It was $300 so I got a decent deal.
>>30483903
>Now I'm seriously reconsidering the tradeoffs between a semi-auto and a revolver.
Ehn.
Five rounds in a .357 strikes me as MORE than enough if you keep a cool head. More importantly, and crucially, revolvers can't stovepipe on you. Every squeeze is a bang, and if you happen to get a dead round (happens in the field sometimes) the clear procedure is "squeeze it again, Clyde."
Revolvers just flippin' work. And that's important when Smoky is looking to maul you a little.
>>30482150
4 inch barrel is just shy of 1400fps, on their chart it shows at 1400fps, the round is pushing 783ftlbs at the muzzle. Also, check a ballistics calculator for 158gr traveling 1550fps. That ends up being just over 800ftlbs at the muzzle too. 18grains of hodgdon lil'gun will give you over about 1577fps, and stays low pressure so blowing up your gun is unlikely. Learn to handload, and your ballistics won't be sub-par.
>>30482240
You don't know what you're talking about
>>30484399
Not an argument.
>>30484399
>It's a "hot 357 shot out of a rat's asshole will outpower any modern handgun cartridge" episode
Oh boy, oh boy
>>30484311
What the fuck are you even smoking? See the link in >>30482240. The only loads that got up to 1400 fps out of a 4" barrel were 125 grain loads, which are not designed for woods defense.
>>30483786
>reasoning for taking the 10mm over the Alaskan?
Capacity and weight
>>30483903
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Dog_Sled_Patrol
"The weapons carried also reflect the harsh conditions. Only bolt-action rifles (M17/M53) performs reliably. The standard SIG210 Neuhausen sidearm was recently replaced by the 10mm Glock 20, as the stopping power of multiple 9mm rounds proved to be insufficient against a polar bear."[13]
This thread is just a fucking mess.
Anyways, OP, black bears. Let me tell you something about black bears. They are the big puss.
>Walking in the woods one day.
>Get tired of trails with disgusting mountain bikers on them, blaze a new trail into the state forest.
>walk about an hour
>pick up a stick, as the terrain is become uphill.
>walk another hour
>get a little tired
>sit down
>pull out thermos
>drink some tea that has been steeping this whole time
>could strip the cosmoline of a mosin
>relax
>look up, see a shape
>squint
>It's a fucking bear
>begin to tactically poop
>realize it is a lone black bear
>walking towards me
>bearscare.exe
>jump to my feet
>sling thermos like I'm G. Dubya throwing an opening pitch
>thermos arcs like a 50-70 at 400yrds
>hits bear in the head
>PONK
>bear spergs
>makes a stupid ass noise
>runs into the woods
My thermos was a little dinged, but I can confirm the one quart size is big enough for bear.
>>30483903
A g40 6" 10mm can have 15x rounds of 800ft lb, but you're also going to be $600-$700 out the door. A 4" 44mag is about the same per shot in energy, but you're not likely going to get many shots regardless.
That said, practicing is the most important thing; you saw Miculek put 6 rounds of hot 44mag in less than 1 second on target.
>>30483903
>>30484650
Oh, and BoulderBro, come shoot muh 45-70 and 500SW I'm getting tomorrow. I'll let you know when I'm heading to the hills
>>30484424
Enjoy.
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100
>>30484650
Good point on the pricing. Practice and range time are number one.
Thanks for the invite man, I'm am totally down. I just responded to the meetup survey. Did you get it?
I'm pretty free these days. Hit me up at [email protected]
>>30484746
>https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100
Holy shit, these guys are claiming their .357 loads beat a .30-30 in a carbine?!
If true, that's kinda amazing.
>>30484746
Show me results of INDEPENDENT testing that supports this. I don't believe Buffalo Bore anymore.
>>30484934
Well it is a 180gr bullet, and they said it was with a 18.5" barrel so plenty of time to get up to speed. Probably catches up to some lighter factory .30-30 so they can make the claim.
>>30480759
>.357 for self-defense
No thanks, I like being able to hear.
>>30483077
>Please stop insulting my intelligence
Said a tripfag on 4chan.
>>30483782
Yeah that's pretty sexy. Being an ignorant amateur myself, are lever actions considered more reliable generally?
>>30483581
OP here, so I've been doing some wiki comparisons between 10mm and .357 mag
It seems that >>30481172 is mostly correct in saying that they have about the same grains at about the same fps. When the grains are the same, they are.
But, 10mm actually tends to be a higher grain bullet than .357, which means it tends to be a slower bullet as well (probably a similar momentum)
And 10mm is also a little wider than .357 (which is about 9mm wide).
So it would seem to be that 10mm has less penetration than .357? I'm not sure on this, but it certainly is a bit slower, heavier, and wider compared to .357
>>30487168
Wading through the thread, OP you basically have one choice: a heavy bullet driven at a velocity fast enough for deep penetration. How you get there is up to you. Shot placement will be critical on a large angry animal, just as it is on humans. You'll need a solid brain pan shot to drop a bear "maus todt."
You'll need a full size pistol with at least a 4 inch barrel because short barreled guns loose too much velocity. A 6" bbl would be better.
A .357 will be cheaper to practice with vs a 10mm or .44 magnum, but the .44 mag can fire lighter .44spl rounds for practice. Ammo selection for 10mm is nowhere near as broad as for the magnums unless you reload/handload.
.357 can chuck in the 200 grain neighborhood but a .44 can chuck in the 300 grain area. I feel sorry for your wrists.
Would not feel underfunded in the lower 48 with a .357 fed with 180-200 grain LFP/JHP full house no-bullshit-loads. Should be enough even for black bear and certainly wolves, coyotes, mountain lions etc.
>>30487168
Same anon as >>30487412
Forgot to add, a lot of the penetration difference between 10mm and .357 has to do with bullet design. There is a fair amount of 10mm with hard cast LFP bullets around 180gr for them but a shit ton of 10mm ammo esp the jhp is made for two legged predators in mind, not four.
>>30487168
Your best friend is going to be handloading. Really any high velocity pistol round will take down a bear, the important part of the round itself is the bullet, and sadly when it comes to commercial ammo you're pretty damn limited when it comes to bullets designed specifically to take dangerous game from a revolver. 200gr cast lead will grant you the best possible penetration with .357 on soft targets, but to my knowledge only 3 companies make this load.
>>30487548
>Gas checked bullets if using lead at those velocities...
A cheap single stage press is never a bad buy. A turret press is even better. Better imo than a progressive press unless you only reload one or two calibers... even a Lee Handloader will get the job done.
My reloading moved out to storage when we had a kid and is waiting on daddy to get a shed to set it back up again. My guns weapon for disuse due to ammo prices.
>>30481028
>What about things that aren't grizzlies? Say, blacks, and mountain lions?
I pissed off a big cat in George Washington National Forest once. He was fairly large, about the size of a large dog. A large german Sheppard sized. It was dark and I had a head lamp and an X200.
Anyway, he was all pissy and circling me making grumpy noises. I didn't have my Akubra or SPAS 12 with me but I was aware these skinwalkers were probably hunting me in pairs or more. After about 15 minutes of him bitching at me I caught him in the path ahead of me about 30 feet up. I got off 2 shots of .45acp and didn't hear anything from him for the rest of the trip. No clue if I hit him or he just noped the fuck out. There wasn't any blood on the spot where he was standing when I shot him but I've been hunting log enough to know that doesn't mean I missed.
I've killed plenty of deer with .357mag out of a revolver and a lever gun to know it'll put some serious hurt on animals given you use the right ammo and do your part. I would not feel undergunned with a 7 or 8 shot .357mag unless I was in grizzly, kodiak or polar bear country; or it was moose mating season. I'd want a 5"-6" barrel and some beefy ammo if there was any dangerous animals near. Probably something like the Buffalo Bore outdoorsman line, which I believe you can use in any revolver. It'll over penetrate but it's better that than the alternative.
If you're not going to carry a long .357mag, I'd say upgrade to .44mag. A 3" .44mag packs enough ass to dissuade just about anything but the biggest animal assholes. You can convince an animal that your juicy insides aren't worth tangling ass with, using a smaller gun than you'd necessarily use to hunt them. A bigger gun never hurts in these situations but aren't required in many cases.
>>30481076
>If you're talking bear, then it's pretty much useless - you're better off with a magfed 10mm due to more rounds and faster reloading.
>If it's against humans, same thing
>If ALL you're worried about i bears, bring bearspray and a .454 Casull or .500S&W. .357 is pretty weak
Go back to battlefield.
>>30480759
1. Do you already have the .357? if so what.
2. Do you have a .357 in mind for purchase? If so what, and are you willing to change that?
Personally I'd recommend a Ruger Blackhawk or Redhawk in .45 colt, you can get light loads for target shooting or heavy loads for innawoods.
>>30487746
I don't have one, or one in mind. I know i was eyeing the redhawk for a while, but that's prone to change very easily
Looking at the .45 colt, it's an interesting cartridge. Grains from 225 to 325, and muzzle energy from 570 to 1,700
Compared to the .44 mag, grains from 240 to 340, and muzzle energy from 1,000 to 2,000. At least according to the wiki
>>30487746
You can get aftermarket handle scales for the redhawk, right? I don't like the rubber grip desu
>>30481608
That finish
>>30481076
A loaded X frame revolver weighs nearly 4 lbs. May as well carry a rifle or shotgun... it'll carry better on a sling.
>>30488255
Any wood shop can make after market grips for a black/RedHawk.
>>30487412
>Ammo selection for 10mm is nowhere near as broad as for the magnums unless you reload/handload.
I can get more different ammo for 10mm that any magnum. But what do I know, I just actually own guns.
>".357 useless against bears"
Bears are tough animals with thick hides, but you guys act like they are fucking super mutants escaped from some government lab. A .357 with good ammo will drop an adult black bear no problem. Hell people hunt bear with .357 around here (northern idaho/eastern washington)
It's also worth noting that black bears are timid as fuck, I've run into 4-5 black bears out hiking/hunting over the years and as soon as they see or smell me they start booking it in the other direction. Black bears are also way smaller than hollywood would have you believe.
As far as cougars go, you'd be lucky to even see a cougar in the wild. I've lived here 20+ years now and I've seen a total of one cougar and that was through a spotting scope on the other side of a huge valley at dusk.
>>30488508
It's honestly not. Unless you can pack in like thirty more variants in that picture.
I like 10mm, I don't have a gun in it because it would be redundant for what I need, and because I fell for the 50AE meme, but there is nothing particularly wrong with the statement that the 10mm has less commercial variance than both .357 and .44
>>30484952
http://www.gunblast.com/MilesFortis-AKChurch_BuffaloBore.htm
Independent test done with rifles and pistols. Even the 6" revolver saw over 1500fps 4/5 times with the 180gr buffalo bore. The lowest being 1485.
http://www.shooterscalculator.com/bullet-kinetic-energy.php
Plug in 180gr at 1485fps and look! Over 800ftlbs of energy at the muzzle.
Looks like buffalo bores charts weren't wrong dipshit. The info made by ballistics by the inch was self defense ammo made to work in all 357's and on people. Buffalo bore is hunting ammo made for thick hides and heavier guns, so bbti won't help with answering whether it is good to use a 357 Mag for bear defense.
Doesn't sound like a .357 mag would stand up very long to the type of round loadings people recommend for it.
>>30489117
As long as it is a steel frame and at least a medium frame, it'll be fine. It's when you get into the ruger only loads that things go wrong. Just don't use very high pressure loads. Lil'gun is a good low pressure, high velocity powder. According to the pressure data on Hodgson's reloading website, it's the lowest pressure loading, but also the highest velocity with 158gr projectiles
>>30488572
Black bears are known to be able to attack humans, sure a bear will leave you alone most of the time but unlike grizzlies a black bear can just decide he want to slap your shit and eat you.
>>30489596
Grizzlies can decide that too, only they're eight times as big, and usually decide "yes, i do want to fuck this guy's shit up"
>>30487168
>>So it would seem to be that 10mm has less penetration than .357? I'm not sure on this, but it certainly is a bit slower, heavier, and wider compared to .357
The few fps and grain differences at the high end of each caliber are really insignificant at this level. This is like arguing over Federal 115 grain 9mm vs. Speer 124 grain 9mm. Upgrading to .44 magnum will give significantly different results, but at the 10mm/.357 mag level, there's not a whole lot of difference.
>>30482526
>https://thegreatwhitehunter.wordpress.com/the-longest-minute-terrifying-bear-attack/
Note: Items #2 and #3
>>30487412
>A .357 will be cheaper to practice with vs a 10mm or .44 magnum, but the .44 mag can fire lighter .44spl rounds for practice. Ammo selection for 10mm is nowhere near as broad as for the magnums unless you reload/handload.
As someone who owns more than one handgun, I always thought that this was an extremely gimmicky reason to get a .357 revolver, which it is, since I'm right. In any case, though, your information is very out-dated and inaccurate. You can shoot .40S&W out of a 10mm handgun with no ill effects, and you can also get a .40S&W conversion barrel to plink with.
As for ammo selection, Sellier and Beloit recently came out with a FMJ loading at the $14.95 price point. PPU and Armscor have their plinking load priced in the $17-18 range. Sig Sauer makes a "full power" load - 180 grains at 1250 fps - that can be found in gun shops or online in the $20-30 range, depending on where you shop, which is right in the same price range of full power .357 magnum.
Remington, American Eagle, Buffalo Bore, Norma, Underwood, Double Tap, PMC all make 10mm ammo, and it can be found consistently at gun stores. If not out of ignorance, I have no idea why people continue to perpetuate this myth
>>30488751
>having thirty ammo manufactures making their own "variant" of a caliber is necessary and a good thing
Why the fuck do you think this is even a factor?
>>30488806
None of the guns tested have a 4" barrel. Fucking idiot. Can't you read your own sources?
>>30491655
It's not always bears... you have to be ready for any large predator that may attack a human. Super ridiculous caliber I get only one shot may not be best (I'm looking at you .500 crowd). Also gun you cannot afford to practice with probably will not save your life in a crunch. Think about total use/training element.
>>30491642
>but at the 10mm/.357 mag level, there's not a whole lot of difference.
I own both
>>30483063
and you're wrong.
>>30491726
Handloads with 158gr over 18gr of lil gun will push about 1500fps and make over 800ft lbs with a 4 inch barrel. It is possible. And the fact you're nitpicking 20ftlbs on buffalo bores site tells me no amount of proof will ever convince you.
>>30488338
This anon has it. 12 gauge and buy a good sling.
>>30492398
>you're wrong cuz I sed so!!
Not an argument.
>>30492434
The fact that you are loading cartridges to pressures that will destroy many .357 mag guns just tells me that you don't know what the fuck you're doing. At this point, you need to ditch the .357 mag and level up to a .44 mag.
>>30484537
It was Earl Grey, right?
Bears fucking hate Earl Grey tea.
Source: I am a bear.
>>30493960
No, you're wrong because I actually own both guns.
>>30493971
>Many .357 mag guns
Can't hear you over super common Rugers.
>>30494267
Like I said, that's not an argument.
>>30494287
Not addressing the point I raised.
>>30494398
>I know what you are but what am I
I keep forgetting summer
>>30486792
>Yeah that's pretty sexy. Being an ignorant amateur myself, are lever actions considered more reliable generally?
For rifle actions, probably the MOST reliable is a break action, like the fancy dual barrel hunting rifles use.
Shortly after that comes the bolt action, assuming it's decently engineered. The Mauser 1898 action is one of the earliest such good designs, but there are others.
After that comes falling block actions, and then, lever/pump actions.
That said, a GOOD lever action is super reliable, and most of the 'classic' ones are very very good these days. The big advantage of a good lever/pump action is that it is both reliable and fast. It feeds from a magazine and does not require you to move your cheek weld or fore-hand grip to reload.
Watching a fellow speed-shoot a lever-action is fun indeed, and will point out the advantages of the action. Plus, it can handle SUBSTANTIAL rounds like the .45-70 without effort.
>>30494759
>"you're wrong because I own two guns!"
Friendly reminder that you actually said this, expecting to be taken seriously.
You're not a special snowflake. I've owned .357 mag revolvers before too, and currently own a Glock 20. According to idiot logic, my word that these calibers are equivalent cancels out your word that these calibers aren't equivalent. Neither of us likely owns any sort of sonar equipment to test actual bullet speeds. Neither of us is actually addressing any relevant points at all. See how this is not an argument? If not, then I have only contempt for your intellect.
Here's an argument: At the upper end of bear loads, both 10mm and .357 mag can launch a 180-200 grain bullet at velocities upwards of 1300 fps out of common handguns in their respective calibers. They are therefore equivalent in power, with only minor, insignificant differences across different boutique loadings. You can carry a longer 6" barrel revolver to squeeze a few dozen extra fps out of the .357 mag, just as you can carry a 6" Glock 20 to squeeze a few extra fps out of the 10mm. This is what I mean when I say that the two calibers are equivalent. If your reply to this post doesn't address this point, then I will just dismiss it as "not an argument" yet again, since you probably won't learn anything, ever.
>>30495079
>I've owned .357 mag revolvers before too, and currently own a Glock 20.
>>30495173
>tfw have 500SW, brenneke 3" 600gr 12g slugs, and 405gr .45-70
I shall fear no bear.
But honestly, I'll probably still carry bear spray.
>>30480968
>>30480759
.40s and 9mm have brought down moose and black bears. I think he will be safe with a .357 plus it'll be easier and faster for follow ups
>>30495900
Yeah sure thing no guns
>>30494267
What are you even arguing about? All that anon said in his post was that he owned a couple guns and preferred to carry one in particular. There's literally nothing objectively wrong with that.
>>30495079
>>30496017
>>30496017
>What are you even arguing about?
>>30491642
>at the 10mm/.357 mag level, there's not a whole lot of difference.
>>30492398
>I own bothand you're wrong.
>>30482225
>It is a Taurus
I stopped reading there.
>>30488572
Western WA bro here. Every time these threads pop up I wonder if 90% of the posters have even seen a black bear in the wild. I've come across dozens of black bear while backpacking (without any danger). All the time spent researching what gun to carry could be better spent on learning how to avoid a confrontation in the first place.
>>30481028
For blacks i say anything will work, ive spent time in mogadishu trust me once they get hit and if they are not high they fall down or run away right away, use a smaller caliber if you are hunting unarmed ones, this way you get to scalp them alive, if thats your thing, try it its very entertaining,
>>30497201
>I wonder if 90% of the posters have even seen a black bear in the wild.
>>30491655
>https://thegreatwhitehunter.wordpress.com/the-longest-minute-terrifying-bear-attack/
Hmm yes keeping the firearm actually on your person and being well acquainted with it are very important aspects of self defense in the woods.
>>30492398
Earlier in the thread I linked a forum in which a bunch of Alaskan hunting guides are discussing handguns. It appears that 10mm has a very strong following.
I can't wait from my new grips for my .44 to come in. I also need to get a few hundred rounds of lighter .44 magnum loads or some .44 special loads to practice with.
Any suggestions for for practice ammo for my .44?
Considering I only spent $300 on the revolver, I'm pretty happy with my decision.
>>30495079
Haha hell yeah. It is nice to see intelligent people take the time to lay something out.
>>30495900
I wonder how effective bear spray is if it being deployed under 10yds and with a charge occurring as the individual becomes aware of the bear.
>>30496233
Less than half the price of a S&W .44
Has ports, and definitely isn't twice as worse. I've made far worse firearms purchase decisions. My father has owned a Taurus PT92 for over two decades with easily 5000 rounds through it and it has functioned extremely well.
>>30480759
For the VAST majority of the US, all you really need is a walking stick. Put some bells on it to make it even more effective. I'm not even close to joking either. If you're in a snakey area and don't like letting poisonous snakes live, you might want to add in a .22 revolver with shot rounds.
If in mountain lion or bear ranges, your best bet is to learn how to avoid them.
>>30497445
>learn to avoid
>mountain lions
firstly, Mountain lions range, quite literally, all over the united states.
second, if a mountain lion wanted to attack you, there is no amount of 'learn to avoid' that can help. they are quick and vicious,
bear mace, bear mace, bear mace
>>30493971
Nope. Low pressure fast burn powder. Max pressure at 18gr is 25000 cup. Lower pressure loading than a titegroup charge(starting load pressure is 32,600 cup) good job proving you know Jack shit about reloading.
>>30499436
Achieving extremely high muzzle velocities out of a short barrel requires high pressure, showing that you not only know nothing about reloading, but your reading comprehension is at a 1st grader's level.
>>30499475
Again, extremely fast burning powder, low pressure. You obviously can't read. Here is load data from the Lee 357 magnum die sheet. Lil gun, under 158 gr xtp. Read that data. There are no warnings it is a ruger only, or high pressure load. Here is a link to a forum thread where a few posts down someone posted their own data using it and how it isn't a high pressure load as well.
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-327249.html
>>30499679
>I learned a few things about reloading so therefore I know EVERYTHING about it too :P
No information here addresses barrel length. Nice try, though.
>>30499720
In the forum, a poster stated he got 1520fps with 17.8gr of lilgun pushing a 158gr projectile from his 4" ruger security 6. That's 811ft lbs dingus. Hodgdons data shows that the max load, which is full case space, doesn't exceed 25,800 cup, which is low fucking pressure. Powder companies wouldn't publish it if it wasn't accurate otherwise they'd risk lawsuits out the ass. I'm sorry 357 isn't your cup of tea, but I'm done arguing with a brick wall.
>>30499829
>source: a poster on THR forums
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.
>>30499679
That was a different anon, I don't load ammo I shoot it.
Do you have more load data images for .357 and .38?
>>30497291
Welcome to the 10% club.
>>30498359
Mace is never a bad idea, much easier to carry weight wise than a gun. But a large part of avoiding conflict with animals is making your presence known, even with mountain lions. The bigger, louder, and more dangerous you can seem the better. They won't start a fight that they aren't confident in winning.
>>30482461
Yes, I want to buy it.
>>30481028
>blacks
I usually just call the police, honestly. Much less chance of getting zimzammed.
