Author Topic: your thoughts on this quote? (Read 1580 times)

fatercat · « **on:** August 27, 2007, 02:46:06 PM »

The 357 Magnum is occasionally promoted as a deer cartridge. In the hands of an experienced hunter who calmly places the right bullet in the right place at close range, it will just barely get the job done most of the time, but when used by the average hunter, the .357 Magnum leaves a great deal to be desired in that role. As a hunting cartridge, the .357 is seen at its best when used on varmints or for close range shooting of the smaller game animals such as javelina.

MS Hitman · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2007, 03:59:01 PM »

I'm just glad what few deer I've killed with a .357 mag didn't read that quote. It'd be a shame for them to know they died from an inferior cartridge.

Jerry Lester · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2007, 04:23:59 PM »

Well, first off; I don't quite understand the concept of "barely" dead.

As far as "leaving a lot to be desired", yes, if you're needing a rifle for shooting deer past 100-125 yards, it's not enough for the average hunter. If you're wanting to blow shoulders nearly off, or leave exit holes big enough to put your head in, it's not enough. If your common shot is up the butt because you're used to seeing tails instead of close broadside or quartering shots like you should be striving to see, again, it's not enough.

If though, you're a good woodsman/hunter that "truly" respects the game you're pursuing, and you can consistently get within 100 yards or less, and have enough self control to pass on some of the rediculous shots that a lot of the "big magnum" crowd are all to willing to take it's more than just enough. It's perfectly suited to hunting deer if you merely apply all the rules that we've all preached, and/or heard preached since we picked up that first gun, and took out after our first squirrel.

Personally, I think it's sad that so many hunters have lost touch with reality, and the true thrill of an actual "hunt". I guess we can thank all those magazines that reside beside our bathroom thrones.

superdown · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2007, 05:26:07 PM »

WOW i am really glad all those black bear my great uncles shot in the ear with a 22lr didn't realize they were dead instantly only from what I've seen . that quote is the one thing that tells me that whoever came up with it doesn't have much hunting experience. let me clarify that i DO NOT condone using the 22 or any other under sized or questionable round for the intended game but depending on how hungry you are will have lot to do with the capability of a certain cartridge or caliber and shot placement . justin

Mikey · « **Reply #4 on:** August 28, 2007, 01:03:06 AM »

Geez, and to think I never knew that...................................Mikey.

OLDHandgunner · « **Reply #5 on:** August 28, 2007, 01:16:57 AM »

The deer that I have shot with my 357 Mag with 140gr HP never knew what hit them.
Must be they were " just barely dead ".

.357 shooter · « **Reply #6 on:** August 28, 2007, 09:47:44 AM »

Shouldn't you place all bullets in the right place no matter what caliber your shooting? Good thing my NY deer are still uneducated, and can't read. All the ones I killed would come back alive, knowing they are barely dead...

Bryan

swampthing · « **Reply #7 on:** August 28, 2007, 10:42:51 AM »

It's funny I've seen deer/hogs perfectly hit with 180g 30-06 loads they just turned and ran away, they too were also barely dead.
A more accurate term/quote might be: They {the animals} don't know they're dead YET !
Load up a .357 with some H110 under a 180g LBT, FN, hardcast, you'd be surprised just how fast game realizes they are dead.

fowler · « **Reply #8 on:** August 28, 2007, 11:25:24 AM »

The best elk hunter I know said "I killed 8 elk with a .243 as a boy before someone told me it was not a elk rifle". The point is naturally, shoot what you have very well, very carefully and with great precision and everything will work out every time. The trouble is when things don't go perfectly and you have to take a going away shot on a wounded elk at 350 yards in fading light and that 243 will seem pretty damn small but so would a 338!

jaybird · « **Reply #9 on:** August 28, 2007, 01:28:12 PM »

I have hunted deer with rifles for about 20 years. This year I plan to hunt with an open-sighted pistol so there is a little more challenge. I have been working on loads and practicing nearly every day this summer. I am most likely going to hunt with my 357 over my 44 due to the fact that I can shoot it much more accurately. Is the 357 the best tool for the job? NOPE. My rifle is. At the 30 yards I can see in the cedar swamp where I hunt, I think the 357 will do just fine. As long as I choose a high percentage shot (which I ALWAYS do, even with a rifle), the right bullet will penetrate to the vitals and kill even the biggest of deer we have here in upper michigan.

Dusty Miller · « **Reply #10 on:** August 28, 2007, 02:10:58 PM »

When you think of some of the bozos who show up in the woods on opening day then "average hunter" takes on a whole new meaning. In that light I think the statement holds water. However, for the hunter who has spent enough time at the range to place his/her shots where they belong and can discipline himself to take only high percentage shots then its a different story.

Davemuzz · « **Reply #11 on:** August 28, 2007, 02:34:34 PM »

I'm printin this out and posting it in all the woods across America so all the deer can read it. HA! Now all you 357 guys will be screwed. The deer you shoot will never even fall down....heck, they won't even bleed. You'll have to buy 44 magnums....and I'll have at least 2 dozen on GunBrokeNow for sale. I'll make a huge profit.

I love this country.

Dave.

warrior1 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 29, 2007, 05:53:46 AM »

i guess i will have to the guys at the range especially the one who took 9 deer with his 357 that it just will not kill them deer. of course it could be the steriods in the cattle feed have toughen up the modern deer.
i

superjay01 · « **Reply #13 on:** August 29, 2007, 07:11:33 AM »

fatercat, you are right on the money with this. I'm not sure why everyone is up in arms about it. It the hands of the right hunter a 357 is more than enough gun to kill a deer. However, in the arms of the average hunter it is not. With respect to all of the people on this chat board they are not the average hunter. My brother owns a gun shop, so I am there as much as I can be, and the average hunter that comes in doesn't know the differences between between a 300 win mag 300 wsm and 300 ultra mag.

corbanzo · « **Reply #14 on:** August 29, 2007, 08:44:53 AM »

What I want to know is what makes a hunter average? I would say the average handgun hunter can make a fairly well-placed shot on an animal with a handgun, plain and simple. With that said, the .357 is plenty for deer. And what makes a deer harder to kill than a javelina? I have seen some pretty tough javelina.

If you are the average rifle hunter, or an expert rifle hunter, and you aren't competent with a handgun, you won't be able to do it the first time (without a little luck), which is why people who hunt with handguns are called handgun hunters.

If you can shoot a good group on a target with a .357, you can kill a deer with a .357.

Davemuzz · « **Reply #15 on:** August 29, 2007, 08:57:21 AM »

Quote from: corbanzo on August 29, 2007, 08:44:53 AM

If you can shoot a good group on a target with a .357, you can kill a deer with a .357.

Agreed!!! The scary part is what the heck would an "un-average" hunter be doing with a handgun...in the woods....trying to kill a deer? I can't recall ever seeing such a person. But then, I've never claimed to have met everyone who has walked the face of the planet either.

Dave

nighthawk80 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 29, 2007, 09:09:30 AM »

I don't reply much, but I do read here daily. I was like most of you here until I read superjay01's post. Even though I know and you know that the 357 mag. is more than capable of taking a dear effectively, most of these "average hunters" only know what they are told/taught by other so-called "average hunters". The so-called "average hunter" (I hate that term) only practice once a year. I use to work with an "average hunter", he picked up his rifle the day before gun season, and sometimes wouldn't even sight it in. These so-called "average hunters" aren't really hunters in my opinion. They blast at the intended animal until it stops moving and consider it a good day. They have no regard for the responsible way to hunt an animal.

Skillet · « **Reply #17 on:** August 29, 2007, 10:24:41 AM »

Is that it very closely approximates that of a human (you have to consider muscle distribution, size/weight, bone structure etc.)

No one will deny the effectiveness of a 357 against human foes. There's no reason that it shouldn't 'disconnect' a deer just as efficiently.

After reading about the effectiveness of the 125 grain .357 load, according to law enforcement statistics, as a "one-shot" stopper in police shootouts, my cousin proceeded to make up some 125 gn handloads for whitetail hunting.

He hit three with this load out of his 8 3/8" barrel model 27 and they all dropped deader than lard. We recovered one bullet that had expanded to .70 caliber and had penetrated into the stomach after traversing through the brisket and chest (the deer was facing him straight on).

From what I've seen, a good .357 load is bloody-adequate for whitetail at regular handgunning ranges.

I'm not touting the .357 for my own gain, I shoot .44 special handloads with a hardcast bullet out of a S&W 624, foregoing any illusions of expansion at the moderate velocities I use for filling my tags. My 250 grain bullet is poking along at barely 1000 fps. A lot of "experts" would call this load 'inadequate'... but you'd have trouble convincing the 21 whitetail, two feral hogs and four javelina that have so-far fallen to it.

If you shoot a .357 better than a .44 mag, you'll get more meat with the gun you shoot the best.

Shot placement is the thing.

Skillet

kennisondan · « **Reply #18 on:** August 29, 2007, 05:31:26 PM »

Guess the one I killed with 38 silver tips ( close range heart shot ) was less than barely dead... but he was not barely alive at least... shot placement is what kills deer, even with a two bladed broadhead...
average hunter is an undefined term that can change the whole statement around instantly... the average guy out there is not very serious not very accurate and not very knowlegeable or able to follow a blood trail or call a shot...
if it does not fall (DRT) .. he just keeps trucking ... if that is average, then it is a large and fearsome caliber indeed that will have to make up for poor shot placement and inability to track a wounded animal.. I don't know if there is a lot of percentage in the largest fastest rifles out there making up for poor shooting and poor woodsmanship...
but that is just me.. I just like a bigger gun, but have seen many dead deer shot with the 357, and could harvest any one of the deer I have shot with a pistol and will shoot with a pistol with anything from 357 through the 50 calibers.... as long as I do my part... if I do not hit it well my chances are slim as far as recovery anyway, despite dogged trailing and other techniques...
I think the quote is suitable for stirrring controversy and spreading misinformation abou the 357 and by default leads to false conclusions about bigger guns and bullets...
dk

buck460XVR · « **Reply #19 on:** September 01, 2007, 07:06:37 AM »

as with any hunting apparatus the .357 has it's limitations. Those that use it to hunt deer and use it accordingly within it's limitations are intelligent and responsible hunters. Some of us that have used it for deer hunting have used it because of it's limitations. The challenge of putting a well placed shot on a medium sized game animal at fairly close range(for me within 35 yards) tends to give more of a thrill than blasting away at 200 yards with a 300 mag with a 9 power scope...........at least to some of us.

After shooting my .460 and seeing it's amazing accuracy and power out to ranges that would challenge most 30-30's I could say that using even a .44 magnum for deer is being under gunned..........and it is.......for the "average" hunter. But then a lot of the average hunters are under gunned with the 300 mag.

**oneshot** · « **Reply #20 on:** September 01, 2007, 11:29:03 AM »

I've never shot a deer with a 357 but I did witness one deer get shot with one 158gr hollow point. The deer jumped and ran about 65yds and piled up. The shot was about 50yds, and my buddy hit a little left of his aim point but still hit both lungs. I was shocked at the damage when we gutted it out. I didn't think a 357 would do that. I was wrong.

Dee · « **Reply #21 on:** September 01, 2007, 01:08:09 PM »

Quote from: fatercat on August 27, 2007, 02:46:06 PM

The 357 Magnum is occasionally promoted as a deer cartridge. In the hands of an experienced hunter who calmly places the right bullet in the right place at close range, it will just barely get the job done most of the time, but when used by the average hunter, the .357 Magnum leaves a great deal to be desired in that role. As a hunting cartridge, the .357 is seen at its best when used on varmints or for close range shooting of the smaller game animals such as javelina.

I would like to know what the writer's PERSONAL experience is with the 357 mag, as a hunting cartridge, and I would like to know WHERE he draws his KNOWLEDGE of the skills of the AVERAGE hunter, whom uses the 357, and also WHEN has he actually OBSERVED this to be true of the average hunter and the 357 combo.
It would sound to me that he were promoting HIMSELF, and I can only assume him to be a self-proclaimed EXPERT, in the gun writer trade, whom usually have nothing more than a degree in journalism at best, and some hunting experience, which most here on this forum have (hunting experience). I have long since abandoned the gun rags, as nothing more than gun and ammo advertisements that you pay to read. A statement such as that would be made by someone who in turn would tout the effectiveness of a bow and arrow as being more than enough for deer, ignoring the fact that the 357 mag delivers far more energy on impact.

MS Hitman · « **Reply #22 on:** September 01, 2007, 02:28:33 PM »

Unless I missed it, I'd like to know the author of this quote that started the thread.

Davemuzz · « **Reply #23 on:** September 02, 2007, 03:44:05 AM »

It doesn't matter.....it's too late for this year. All of said deer have now been educated, and none will fall to the 357. Those bullets will bounce off their hides like BB's from a 30 year old Daisy.

So, now that you know the truth, I'm willing to buy your old hunting 357's for $50 each. Maybe $75 if you are throwing in a holster and the gun doesn't have any scratches.

Hey, it's a deal and you know it!

That's the purpose of this forum.....just helping out a gun owner in need!

Dave

BlkHawk73 · « **Reply #24 on:** September 02, 2007, 06:09:47 AM »

Same mentality as the .30-30 as being barely useable as a deer cartridge. Game hasn't gotten tougher hides so hy the need for such super magnum. It's more power for the ego than anthing now-a-days. having the biggstand badbestmakes for a more puffed out chest. Too bad many equate the magnums with not needing properly placed shots.

fatercat · « **Reply #25 on:** September 02, 2007, 10:30:08 AM »

this quote was from "reloadersnest.com". i just bought a smith & wesson 27-3 with 8 3/3" barrel, 2 boxes nosler 180 gn. partations. and 500 brass, powder,primers,dies. i was looking for different loads when i found this. i thought it was interesting. i agree with most it is plenty of gun. 50 yards or less for me. it did not say who was the author.

Swampman · « **Reply #26 on:** September 02, 2007, 10:39:35 AM »

"The .357 Magnum cartridge (and S&W gun) was an instant runaway success. S&W had originally conceived a very limited demand, with individual registered revolvers being individually built to individual customer’s specifications. That lasted for only about two years. Not only did every cop in the nation want one, but Major Wesson also made the new revolver a sportsman’s choice by setting out on a highly publicized hunting trip to take nearly every major species of big game in North America with an eight-inch version of the new revolver. And he did it. For the next 20 years, until Elmer Keith’s heavy-loaded .44 Specials became the second ammo recipe to be poured from a magnum bottle, the .357 was the cartridge that every serious handgun shooter had to have. Even today, nearly three generations later, the .357 Magnum remains second to none in popularity for general-purpose sport, hunting, and law enforcement/personal-defense use in a revolver."

Shooting Times Magazine

Hairtrigger · « **Reply #27 on:** September 02, 2007, 12:38:31 PM »

Quote from: fatercat on August 27, 2007, 02:46:06 PM

The 357 Magnum is occasionally promoted as a deer cartridge. In the hands of an experienced hunter who calmly places the right bullet in the right place at close range, it will just barely get the job done most of the time, but when used by the average hunter, the .357 Magnum leaves a great deal to be desired in that role. As a hunting cartridge, the .357 is seen at its best when used on varmints or for close range shooting of the smaller game animals such as javelina.

How many deer have you needed to kill and at what distances to come up with this?