http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/357MAGelk-1.jpg

This cow was shot at about 50 feet. First shot struck the chest from broadside and broke a rib going in. Both lungs were badly damaged. The bullet was found balled up under the hide on far side side. Second bullet struck farther back. The diaphragm was torn and liver damaged. The elk galloped away as if unhurt. I waited about an hour and took up the trail. About 150 yards away, the animal was found dead as Julius Caesar.

This cow elk weighed approx 500 lbs.

357 MAG is certainly no long distance cartridge. But up close, it's up to the task.

tech info: 158 grain hollow tip factory ammo by PMC. Taurus revovler with 6 inch barrel.

TR

Nice shooting TR.

Can it work? Yes. Is it the proper weapon for elk? No as it could have had a completely different outcome.

For the sake of a humane kill on the animal you choose to hunt, please use a bigger caliber weapon next time.

Sorry, but (IMO) you got lucky.

A .357 Mag is a terrible choice for hunting Elk.

If I read the South Dakota regulations correctly they require firearms used for Elk to be "factory rated" as producing a minimum of 1700 FPE at the muzzzle. Even the best .357 Magnum loads do less than half that, more like 1/3, and that is only by hand loading! I assume this animal was not shot in South Dakkota?

Exactly.

Someone managed to down an Elk with a .357. All of a sudden, a .357 Mag is an elk round.

It's a joke.

No offense to the OP, but you're part of the problem dude.

Wanna hunt elk? Use a rifle (.270 minimum) or a TC in something big.

Funny. A guy successfully harvests a game animal with caliber XYZ and tells about it. Other guys jump on him for using an "inadequate" cartridge, despite full penetration of the chest cavity. Other guy suggests maybe the firearm wasn't even legal.

How 'bout a "Nice shot, congratulations!" Or even "Wow, I'm surprised that cartridge performed so well."

I know I'm probably just grouchy, but sheesh. I wonder how many people can tell me they have PERSONALLY shot an elk with caliber XYZ, and made a GOOD hit, and the elk survived. I'd guess none, because if the elk survived, you can't prove that you made a good hit.

Anyway, congrats TR.

Nice shooting! The guy got a double-lung on his first shot, yet people are saying it isn't enough gun?!!:rolleyes: Before the .44Mag came out, didn't the lil' .357 Mag kill just about everything?

Jim

I think there are a few too many FPE followers... The bullet pentrated enough and harvested the animal cleanly... Nice job, you have the proof and all talk of not enough gun, etc is arm chair quartebacking after the fact. Sure a 454 is higher on the food chain than a 357, but you obviously had enough, if you did not you would not have the Elk.


Good shoot congradulationshttp://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/thumb.gif

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/Beers.gif

Way to go! This illustrates that a guy who is hunter enough to get close and make a cool shot probably knows more about the sport (and himself) than many others. My guess is you either know your limitations from experience and have good skills, or you were just lucky. Big guns and fancy bullets rarely compensate for proper shot placement with an average bullet on a cow elk. On the other hand, I traded in all my .357s a long time ago because all other things being equal, I do like to improve my odds if longer distance and bigger animals are a possibility. I also use "fancy" bullets.
I wouldn't have any problem attempting to duplicate your success with a .357 at 50' with a cow elk. Heck, I suppose my odds would be better with a .357 at 50' than with a .44 at 50 yards!
Congrats again!

Nice shooting! The guy got a double-lung on his first shot, yet people are saying it isn't enough gun?!!:rolleyes: Before the .44Mag came out, didn't the lil' .357 Mag kill just about everything?

Jim



Yep, that's not the first Elk to be taken with a 357 Mag..The 357 has even been used to take Grizz amoung ever types of big game.. While there are caliber choices that are higher on the food chain than the 357, none the less properly loade and properly placed the 357 will and has and will continue to take its share of game...

If you place the bullet properly it really doesn't much matter how big, how heavy, or how fast it is going, you'll make meat. And if you fail to place the bullet properly, the same still largely applies. No amount of power can substitute for woodscraft, marksmanship and patience. Still today you'll find many Canadian Indians who take all their meat with .22 rimfires.

I think you know where I stand. Way to go, great shot !! show us a picture.

Great shot and photo, TR, just look at that smile. How recently was this, and where? I wonder if an XTP the same weight would have exited, we know a BTB would have.
Andy

Great shot. Tell us more about the hunt. Looks like the ol 357 does it again.

The hunt was planned for last weekend of firearms season in Crook County, Wyoming. I rolled into camp about 4 hours before dark. Leaving my .308 rifle in camp, I hiked to the ridge to look over the valley beyond for next morning's hunt. The Taurus was holstered at my waist; this is bear and cougar country.

A huge boulder was my seat as I glassed the big valley with my 10X field glasses. It sounded like cattle walking through the trees behind me. But when I turned to look, I saw several cow elk with their youngsters. I drew my revolver and shot into the crease behind the shoulder. Distance was close, about 50 feet or so. The animal flinched and trotted away. I shot again but it hit farther back than I'd planned. The elk galloped away.

Now you know the rest of the story.

357 MAG hits hard at archery distances. But it is not in the same power league as genuine rifle cartridges. The point of this photo and story is to share an interesting hunting event. But I'm not suggesting that 357 MAG is an IDEAL cartridge for taking elk.

Elk are large and tough but not armor-plated. Many local hunters in this state take elk every season with common 30-30 saddle guns.
TR

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/bulltrotting.jpg

As Paul Harvey would say. We now know the rest of the story. Glad you had the Taurus with you.

Its good shot placement that gets the animal. The proof is laying there at his feet. This hunter knows what he is doing with the weapon of his choice. Great SHOTS and the meat will taste as good as if it were shot by a 270.:D

Heck I'm surprised the bullet didn't bounce off the elk and possibly injure you! Just kidding. I catch the same type of treatment from friends and family who think my 243 is only good for groundhogs. It has worked fine on deer for me for the last 25 years. Nice shoot'n TR! Dave

Very nice elk and a fine shot too. I shot a whitetail with my 357 and the damage you described and penetration were nearly identical. The whitetail being obviously smaller, but it was at 50yards.

Obviously your game only went 150 yards, the gun was adequate.

Congrats again.

Terry :)

Good shot...but doggone it, ain't it bad enough to have to gut out an elk after dark only to have to come back to camp and clean a dang ol' revolver!

TR
Great job man! As it has been said already-any bullet place where it needs to be will get meat on the table! Those that have complained are just showing there lack of hunting skills!

The picture is the proof; no need to look at energy tables or shot up jello. :)

This thread reminds me of an experience I had a few years ago. We had a fresh snow and I had two mtn. lion hunters with me looking for tracks. Each had a licence and both were using the same .357 mag. revolver. One hunter was green and the other seasoned. Same with their shooting skills. The greenie got the first cat in the tree and it was a mess. He emptied the revolver on the kitty and I had to finish it off with my .44. His shooting was poor and none of his shots were good though all hit the cat.
Later that day I cut more tracks and off we went. The experienced hunter/marksman (who was father to the greenie) now got his chance. One cool, swift, precise shot sealed the deal. Same .357, same ammo, same critter. Two very different outcomes.

Thanks for all the friendly responces. The first few seemed unkind which confused me at the time.

I've taken several mule deer with this 357 MAG revolver (on purpose). I have the precious priviledge of being able to hunt prairie deer and hills deer each year. Typically, I hunt with this Taurus revolver first week or so. Its fun to stalk animals in rough country to get within good shooting distance. My revolver has open sights and my middle age eyes can't focus them very well past 80 feet. But as season is nearing end, my scoped 30-30 or .308 comes out of the cabinet.

357 MAG has taken big full sized mulies for me. In my opinion, weight of the animal is not as much a factor as thickness of chest wall. The bullet has to punch through this barrier to reach the lungs. Chest wall thickness is nearly same whether buck is 150 or 250 lbs. In contrast, a California wild boar is built much sturdier than a Dakota muley although live weight is same or less!
TR

Nice shooting! The guy got a double-lung on his first shot, yet people are saying it isn't enough gun?!!:rolleyes: Before the .44Mag came out, didn't the lil' .357 Mag kill just about everything?

Jim

yep... and that's why i STILL contend the .357 mag out of a 6" barrel will take anything in no.america.. two legged or four...... nice shooting T.R.

Thanks for all the friendly responces. The first few seemed unkind which confused me at the time.

357 MAG has taken big full sized mulies for me. In my opinion, weight of the animal is not as much a factor as thickness of chest wall. The bullet has to punch through this barrier to reach the lungs. Chest wall thickness is nearly same whether buck is 150 or 250 lbs. In contrast, a California wild boar is built much sturdier than a Dakota muley although live weight is same or less!
TR

My only question would be if you are using the 158 grain HP load for intentional shots. Isn't this the load the FBI was using before the massacre in Miami? There are hunting loads for the 357 with better bullets at higher velocities.

The 158 grain hollow tip is accurate and always tears a deadly wound channel. Doesn't seem necessary to switch. I'll let you know if one ever bounces off!
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/Wild_boar_plus_Savage.jpg

I do not hunt boar with this revolver. My choice is .308 with 180 grain soft tips. It has killed well for me.

TR

My only question would be if you are using the 158 grain HP load for intentional shots. Isn't this the load the FBI was using before the massacre in Miami? There are hunting loads for the 357 with better bullets at higher velocities.


The issue load at the time was 158 LSWCHP 38 Special +P

The 158 grain hollow tip is accurate and always tears a deadly wound channel. Doesn't seem necessary to switch. I'll let you know if one ever bounces off!
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/Wild_boar_plus_Savage.jpg

I do not hunt boar with this revolver. My choice is .308 with 180 grain soft tips. It has killed well for me.

TR


The 357 mag with 160, 180 or 200 grain flat point hard cast will take pigs such as the one above just fine, I can assure you as I have used the 357 for such with satisfactory results many years ago and I am rather certain that they have not been armor plated in the mean time...

Who loads 180 grain hard cast? I haven't seen any of this type at our local gunshop.

Thanks.
TR

Federal "Cast Core", Double Tap Ammo, Buffalo Bore


http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm


http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_27&osCsid=e18c186506f5a6ccedd63e9f332a71b9

The issue load at the time was 158 LSWCHP 38 Special +P

Thanks...I stand corrected.

Cor-Bon also loads a 180 hard cast at max velocity.

Sheels in Rapid City probably has the Federal Cast core and maybe the Cor-Bon.
Andy

Who loads 180 grain hard cast? I haven't seen any of this type at our local gunshop.

Thanks.
TR

Buffalo Bore loads the 180gr LBT hard and fast - runs to 1800fps out of an 18" levergun.

You can order them from Cabelas.

Oh, for a laugh...

Guns and Ammo TV just went all gooshy about the "new" "low recoil" 170gr .308. Runs to 2000fps.

Hmmm. .357 180 @ 1800 vs .30 170 @ 2000.... I'd call that a wash.

You can run a .357 out of an 18-20 inch carbine almost neck and neck with a 30-30. But we all know a 30-30 is totally inadequate for deer:D

Iron Addict

My old Lyman manual, the only one close to hand, list a top .357 carbine load as just a bit over 1600fps with a 170 grain bullet. Whereas the 30/30 can easily push a 170 grain past 2100fps and likely 2200fps. That is not what I call "almost". That gives the 30/30 nearly double the muzzle energy with a bullet of considerably better sectional density to better retain that energy advantage down range, not to mention a better trajectory.
I agree that the .357 mag, rifle or handgun, is adequate for the careful hunter who limits his range and doesn't push his luck, but it's nowhere in the same league with the 30/30.

Yes, the .30-30 CAN (and does with modern ammunition)... but that's not the point. The point is that the .357 is "almost" equivelent to the original .30-30 Factory loadings.

When it was introduced in 1895, the first Winchester ammunition contained a 160gr. “metal patched” bullet at a published 1,970 f.p.s. That's an ME of 1379 and a TKO of 45.02.

I don't have the specs on the original 170gr bullet, but assuming it made the same 1,970fps as the original 160gr, it would have an ME of 1465 and a TKO of 47.84.

My .357 180gr hits an honest 1800fps (as does the Buffalo Bore). Thats an ME of 1295 and a TKO of 46.28

Buffalo Bore's 158gr .357 hits 2,153fps for an ME of 1626 and a TKO of 48.59.

Now, are these equivelent to modern OEM cartridges? No. But the fact remains that they are more than equal to the original design parameters of the .30-30... plus it's cheaper to load and you can load more of them in the tube. ;)

What value does kinetic energy have?

Most 30-30 170's factory loads only do about 2,000 in a 20 inch barrel. Forget what the specs say out of a 24 inch unless thats what you shoot. Yes, they can be handloaded hotter--so can the .357.

Iron Addict

KE (which I didn't give) really doesn't have a lot of intrinsic value - especially when discussing dissimilar meplats.

I inadvertantly read the TKO calc under the heading KP (Kenetic Pulse) on my spreadsheet.

TKO is (MV*ME)/7000

Whether we like it or not, kinetic energy is the only measure of a projectile's ability to do work. No, it is not a measure of "killing power", neither is any cockamamie formula someone may dream up. There simply is no quantifiable measure of killing power, but kinetic energy is at least a valid measure which holds true regardless of how it may be applied. If anyone believes KE is meaningless then they must consider the .38 special to be the equal of a .357 maximum, or a 25/35 the equal of a .257 Weatherby. A lot of folks on the traditional muzzleloading forum make light of KE as meaningless so I ask them "why isn't 20 grains of powder just as deadly as 120 grains under the same ball?" Uhhh,--- because it doesn't have as much energy?:)
And if TKO refers to John Taylor's "knock-out-value", that is being applied in exactly the way Taylor himself cautioned that it should never be applied. Taylor stated that it has absolutely no application to thin skinned game, it was intended only as an approximation of whether and how long an elephant would be knocked out by a head shot which narrowly missed the brain! I must admit it annoys me to see people use John Taylor's name to lend credibility to their pet notion by totally misinterpeting and misapplying Taylor's writings.

[quote=iron adddict;338376]Most 30-30 170's factory loads only do about 2,000 in a 20 inch barrel. Forget what the specs say out of a 24 inch unless thats what you shoot. Yes, they can be handloaded hotter--so can the .357.

Iron Addict[/quote

But that Buffalo Bore load sited is already claimed to be going 200fps faster than any other factory load or listed handload from any credible source. There are people who claim to get a 150 grain bullet past 2600fps from the 30/30 but I ain't one of them.

Whether we like it or not, kinetic energy is the only measure of a projectile's ability to do work. No, it is not a measure of "killing power", neither is any cockamamie formula someone may dream up. There simply is no quantifiable measure of killing power, but kinetic energy is at least a valid measure which holds true regardless of how it may be applied. If anyone believes KE is meaningless then they must consider the .38 special to be the equal of a .357 maximum, or a 25/35 the equal of a .257 Weatherby. A lot of folks on the traditional muzzleloading forum make light of KE as meaningless so I ask them "why isn't 20 grains of powder just as deadly as 120 grains under the same ball?" Uhhh,--- because it doesn't have as much energy?:)
And if TKO refers to John Taylor's "knock-out-value", that is being applied in exactly the way Taylor himself cautioned that it should never be applied. Taylor stated that it has absolutely no application to thin skinned game, it was intended only as an approximation of whether and how long an elephant would be knocked out by a head shot which narrowly missed the brain! I must admit it annoys me to see people use John Taylor's name to lend credibility to their pet notion by totally misinterpeting and misapplying Taylor's writings.

Which is why I said it was an inadvertant misreading of my spreadsheet.

I was trying to read off the Kenetic Pulse line.

Good shootin.

the main reason people started shooting lighter bullets faster is for flater shooting less learnig curve for long shots, not for more killing power. but a bullet moving 2000fps and the same moving 4000fps will have more power at 400 yards. for a 200 yard shot 2000fps is just fine.

Whether we like it or not, kinetic energy is the only measure of a projectile's ability to do work. .



Any ballistics formular that uses FPE as a basis to rate Wound Trauma Incapacitation is doomed to failure.

Why you ask? Read the following for the answer

"The first law of Thermodynamics requires conservation of total enrgy in any collision, but this information is not useful in analysis of the collision because there is no direct way to determine what fraction of the kinetic energy is transformed into other forms of energy (usually most of this is heat or thermal energy)


"Foot pounds is the Unit typicaly used in ballistics and many other dynamics problems. The British Thermal Unit (BTU) is often used for "heat energy"; one BTU equals approximately 778.1 foot pounds. Joule is the unit of energy in metric (or standard international) units' one joule is equal to one newton meter or one watt secound, and equals approximately 0.73756 foot pounds."


The above quotes are by Duncan MacPhearson and are technicaly and scientificaly correct....

Kinetic energy absorption (the process of the transformation of kinetic energy into thermal energy does not equate to tissue damage in many physical processess)...

Newton's laws of motion describe forces and monemtum transfers not energy relationships.. The dynamic variable that is conserved in collisions is momentum; kinetic energy is not only not conserved in real colisions but is transformed into thermal energy....


If anyone can disprove these basic laws of science, then a Pultzer Prize in Science is a cinch, I am sure of it..... http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/thumb.gif

Here is how I perceive the process of killing an animal with a firearm: bullet diameter in many cases is irrelevant as it flies toward the target. Upon impact, the bullet rips through the chest wall while expanding to form a mushroom shape. This spinning mushroom destroys tissue and causes both shock and significant bleeding. When vital organs are badly damaged like this, the animal topples and dies.

This is not to say that .223 and 444 strike the same. We all know that they do not impact the same. When I stated that some diffferentials in bullet diameters are irrelevent I meant to say small differences. For example: 6mm vs 257 Roberts or 270 vs 280. I hope I stated this without being confusing.

My plain 158 grain hollow tip caused lungs to deflate + massive internal bleeding & related shock due to torn diaphram and punctured liver. Does this make 357 MAG IDEAL for elk hunting? No. Many shooting situations involve 175 yards or more which is absurd for 357 MAG.

But up close, the 357 MAG is easily capable of launching a bullet with enough speed and power to tear through the chest wall to lethally damage chest organs. In my opinion (you're allowed to disagree), my 357 MAG killed this elk at least as efficiently as an archer with modern compound bow and sharp broadhead(s).

Am I suggesting that a 357 MAG handgun hunter get close to his quarry and refrain from shots beyond reasonable archery distances? YES.
TR

the main reason people started shooting lighter bullets faster is for flater shooting less learnig curve for long shots, not for more killing power. but a bullet moving 2000fps and the same moving 4000fps will have more power at 400 yards. for a 200 yard shot 2000fps is just fine.
So I guess you are saying the .38 special 158 grain DOES have the same short range stopping power as a 158 grain .357 mag or max and that within 200 yards the 25/35 IS the equal of a .257 Weatherby?
KE is what makes firearms useable. The plain fact is that recoil momentum of the firearm is always greater than impact momentum of the projectile. So why isn't the recoil more deadly than the bullet impact? Because the bullet has much greater velocity and therefore energy, that's all. And that is why all those formulas based on "momentum" are pure foolishness.
Now whodathunk this post would grow to four pages?

So I guess you are saying the .38 special 158 grain DOES have the same short range stopping power as a 158 grain .357 mag or max and that within 200 yards the 25/35 IS the equal of a .257 Weatherby?
KE is what makes firearms useable. The plain fact is that recoil momentum of the firearm is always greater than impact momentum of the projectile. So why isn't the recoil more deadly than the bullet impact? Because the bullet has much greater velocity and therefore energy, that's all. And that is why all those formulas based on "momentum" are pure foolishness.
Now whodathunk this post would grow to four pages?


FPE is a useless number in the evaluation of a cartidges ability to cause Wound Trauma Incapacitation.

Example my 4" M-57 41 mag shooting a 230 grain flat point hard cast bullet at a chrono'ed 1338 FPS equals 914 FPE. My 500 JRH shooting a 440 grain flat point hard cast bullet at 950 fps has 881 FPE. Judgeing the wounding ability of the 2 cartridges useing FPE as a parameter it wound appear that the 2 cartridges are about equal with a slight edge going to the 41 mag. Yet the exact opposite is true the 500 produces a larger diameter wound channel and has a greater amount of penetration. Why, because the 440 grain 500 bullet has a greater amount of momentum and momentum is what is transfered in real collsion not FPE.

Newton's laws of motion describe forces and monemtum transfers not energy relationships.. The dynamic variable that is conserved in collisions is momentum; kinetic energy is not only not conserved in real colisions but is transformed into thermal energy....

This is scientific fact yet the false and missleading FPE BS is continuely propergated by the various bullet salesmen.(bullet manufactorers)

KE does not mean squat unless the right bullet is being used. if you shoot a elk at 50 feet with a 300 win mag useing a hunting bullet 150grs at 3200fps you will be lucky if you get any penatration and your bullet does not explode. but if shoot it with a 303 british with the same bullet moveing at 2400 2500 fps you will have way better bullet performence.

Of course bullet construction is a vital ingrediant, but "kinetic energy" still means squat, because kinetic energy is transfered into thermal energy. The transfer of Momentum and hydraulic pressure is the what creates the wound channel...

if you can come up with a equasion that incorparates shot placement bullet construction, bullet cal., fps. then math will be able to predict a sutable gun and cartrage. until then experence in the field will tell the tell.:D

KE has extreme limitations. Good example--a 22-250 has about the same KE as a 45-70 with a traditional load. Try shooting some big game with each and tell me KE tells the story. The 45-70 will easily take elk, bear and moose. You want to try that with your 22-250??

Iron Addict

Momentum is not the holy grail either. After all, momentum is conserved when the cartridge is fired from our rifles. I've fired hot loaded 45-70's offhand, and have lived to tell the tale...undamaged by all that momentum transferred to my shoulder.

So Jwp475, how do you reconcile the fact that the recoil momentum of the gun is always considerably greater then the momentum of the bullet?
Slowsuki nailed it, there is no numerical value of killing power and never can be. Many people have come up with "formulas" which they claim to be better than KE for predicting results but they all are just arbitrary values which reflect their own personal preference, generally for heavy bullets. Jeff Cooper was one such, and when a reader remarked that by Cooper's formula a well pitched softball had more stopping power than a .44 magnum Cooper replied "well that only shows that anything can become ridiculous if carried to ridiculous extremes". Wrong Jeff, if a mathematical formula has any validity it remains valid regardless of the size of the numbers plugged in. The reader exaggerated the values to make the foolishness obvious. But the reader could just have pointed out that by Coopers formula the gun has more stopping power at the rear than at the front.
One might just as well skip the math and simply apply arbitrary numbers based on past experience and personal preference. Like, well, lets see, I think the .243 I used last season worked fairly well so I'll give it a "6". But I'm sure the 30/30 is better so I'll give it a "7" and the 30/06 rules so I'll give it a "9", etc. Arbitrary numbers would be just as useful as numbers calculated by an arbitrary formula but numbers calculated by some complex formula just seem more "scientific". It's like my old dad used to say, "figures don't lie but liars do figure".:)

This K.E. argument is old, old hat and is somewhat off the topic. It heavily favors velocity, but I think most of us know that. In some cases, bullets with fairly low K.E. figures kill well, too, and I think most of us know that as well. Personally, I take CoyoteJoe's tongue-in-cheek advice that "One might just as well skip the math" because we have lots of evidence that most all cartridges will kill game when pointed right! It's probably time to let it drop.

It's obvious that a .357 Mag can kill an elk efficiently, because T.R. did so. I think that's the sum of information vital to this thread.

As stated previously FPE is Not Conserved In Collisions and is transformed into other forms of energy mostly thermal energy

Momentum is conserved in real collisons and it is the dierect applied force that is the important part of the equation.
Force is calculated in NEWTONS and 1 Killagram accelarating at 1 meter per secound is equal to 1 Newton
Mass and wieght are not the same thing, mass is a constant any where in the universe and wieght changes depending on the speciffic gravity..

I just hope everyone had fun with this and nobody got their feathers too ruffled.

This K.E. argument is old, old hat and is somewhat off the topic. It heavily favors velocity, but I think most of us know that. In some cases, bullets with fairly low K.E. figures kill well, too, and I think most of us know that as well. Personally, I take CoyoteJoe's tongue-in-cheek advice that "One might just as well skip the math" because we have lots of evidence that most all cartridges will kill game when pointed right! It's probably time to let it drop.

It's obvious that a .357 Mag can kill an elk efficiently, because T.R. did so. I think that's the sum of information vital to this thread.

This oughta kill the KE argument... It's all about bullet placement. ;)

From another site (author is British):

This morning drinking a brew before I set of for work and sitting in bed, outside the pheasants suddenly started cocking up. Hmm I thought, I wonder what they have seen so I got out of bed to see just over the hedge a fox in the field at about 25yds so I went and grabbed my air rifle and loaded up. By the time I had opened the window the fox, a vixen had moved behind a tree and I had to wait all the time seeing the distance growing more and more. Finally at about 50yds she gave me a shot in the misty freezing fog. I aimed for the ribs after a little squeak to get her to stand still for a sec. A reasuring hollow thump sound come back and of she went. After 20yds she slowed to a walk with her head down and slowly disapeared into the fog. ( She made a good one hundred yards)
Soon after the dog fox appeared and in the murk kept visiting what looked like a shadow in the murky fog - I knew I had killed her.

The dog and me went to retrieve her,
http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o65/Nath_bucket/airgunfox.jpg
The air gun is making around 12ft/lbs and she got alot less than that.
Remember all the posts of folk on here using 25/20 to kill deer and 30/20s.
Ft/LBS mean nothing to me :wink: Nath.

:D

Coyote Joe:

No one stepped on my toes except in the beginning of this thread. But I acknowledge that some folks see the world through different lenses than I do.

TR

Nice Elk with tht 357, Can't use a 357 Handgun in Colorado, it doesn't meet their requirement, heck a hot loaded 45 Colt Barely makes it. Les

In Wyoming a handgun cartridge must be at least a .35 cal. and have at least 500 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards to be legal. as far as I know .357 mag. is not legal but .357 maximum is. leaving the argument of whether ft/lbs is as important as people say it is, I think you broke the law.

With the stubby little nose and the small body...that looks like a calf elk to me.

I have enjoyed reading all the posts. Personally I don't like the .357 even though it can do the job.
Years ago before there were as many handgun hunters, a survey was taken to see the difference between the .357 and the then fairly new .44 mag. It was found that deer shot with the .357 had a 50% loss rate while the .44 had a 100% recovery.
Was it due to a lack of energy? NO! It was due to poor bullet choices, some not expanding at all and some coming apart with no penetration.
The problem has not gone away but if the right bullet is used and ranges kept short, Shot placement kept perfect, there is nothing wrong with the .357.
Another factor is lack of bullet weight that stops the bullet before complete penetration. I want two holes. I seen the result last season on a deer a girl shot in the chest with the .223. There was not a single drop of blood on the ground from where she was hit all the way to where I found her by accident later in the day. She went a long way so I tried to back track her to see if there was any blood---Zero, zip. I opened her up and there was a lot of damage but for a short distance. The bullet had fragmented. I gutted her and called my friend to come get his daughters deer. I told him to buy her a 30-30 and put up the toy gun.
That is what is wrong with the .357, one small hole in and even though there will be a lot of damage inside, you can lose the animal.
Of course you can lose one with a huge caliber too when hit wrong, but it cuts down the possibility. It is only a matter of inches between a recovered animal and a lost one.
I lost one hit behind the shoulder with the 45-70! I did some autopsies on deer after and found after feeding heavy, the stomach pushes foreward, raising the lungs. It was a revelation to find how much feed the deer had in it can effect where to shoot. I will now shoot higher behind the shoulder or right into it.
Unless you can hit a silver dollar every shot, offhand, at 50 yd's with your revolver, never say shot placement is the key because few of us can do that. The reason to use a larger caliber and two holes. A couple of inches makes a difference.
I don't think a single one of you can say every shot you take on game hits exactly where you want even with a scoped rifle plus does every animal hold still until the bullet gets there? What about the twig you didn't see? Even an animal that looks broadside can actually be turned a little.
All we can do is to reduce the variables and a larger caliber eliminates one.
We are only human and shake, rattle, roll and wiggle and unless every shot taken is from a rest, forget the perfect shot placement and do the best you can. Handgun hunting is a challange and if you use sandbags for every shot you might as well use a rifle.

Many years ago I knew a guy in Tenn that used to poach deer to put food on the table. Local warden looked the other way because they were doing it for food not profit. He used a 22 mag for this work. The point is yes you can kill with a lessor round but everything has to be just right. When hunting a true sportsman arms himself properly to be able to reliably do their task and a 357 in a revolver on a elk is not the proper round. (maybe is a a T/C contender with a longer barrel and a heavier bullet it would be a different matter) The one taken in this thread looks little bigger than a good sized deer and likely why they were successful. It could have had a completely different outcome.

Out of a revolver, or even TC .357 is not my preferred round for hunting... but out of my Levergun? It's every bit of the gun the original .30-30 was.

Out of a revolver, or even TC .357 is not my preferred round for hunting... but out of my Levergun? It's every bit of the gun the original .30-30 was.

While a 357 is a lot better hunting round in a rifle than a revolver is is not in near the same league as old 30-30 which will hit harder at 100 yards than 357 rifle point blank and many consider a 30-30 weak too. The old ill fated 357 maximum was a good hunting round. It had flame cutting issues in revolvers but in a T/C it was a potent round and well above the performance of a 357 mag in a rifle. Still a 357 rifle hand load with 180 grain bullet would be a reliable deer rifle out to about 100 yards and have low recoil and low muzzle blast too. Would make a nice youth round.

How did you settle on the 100 Yard limit for the 357 in a rifle?

While a 357 is a lot better hunting round in a rifle than a revolver is is not in near the same league as old 30-30 which will hit harder at 100 yards than 357 rifle point blank

Modern .30-30, yes. Old .30-30 No. The original .30-30 load was a 165gr jacketed soft point at 1950fps. There are several commercial .357 loads (by buffalo bore) which out perform that.

and many consider a 30-30 weak too.

There are many who say that you need a Brand New Super Ultra Short Monster Magnum v.3 to kill a whitetail too...

... Still a 357 rifle hand load with 180 grain bullet would be a reliable deer rifle out to about 100 yards and have low recoil and low muzzle blast too. Would make a nice youth round.

It absolutely is... and I've got 3 very DRT deer to prove it... First time I ever hunted with it too.

Some nicely graphic pics:

Rangefinder: 110yds from shooting position to deer (by truck)

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_0532-1.jpg

What a 180gr hard cast bullet @ 1800fps does to a shoulder (edit: at 110 yds. )

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_0534.jpg

Edit: Recovered bullet - this was taken out of the above carcass. It was from an initial snap shot made when I jumped the deer. The Deer was running fast ans I hadn't settled into the lead yet. I pulled this out at the end of a 22" track through a ham. The bullet that caused the above damage was never recovered... though on post-mortem/butcher I followed the bullet track through the destroyed shoulder socket to where the bullet turned into the treacha. My guess is that there is a bullet somewhere in the gut pile....

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_0538.jpg

A couple of Through Shots on deer taken at about 50 yds... same load.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_0570.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_0569.jpg

To me, the practical limitation of 100 yds (+/-) is simply in that I only use Iron Sights. I don't know how fast my bullet was going when it hit that buck, but you can see what it did.

How did you settle on the 100 Yard limit for the 357 in a rifle?

A combo of accuracy, velocity and remaining energy and trajectory. A 357 mag rifle is not going to be a nail driver and when you factor all this together, 100 yards of less is a reasonable limit. Could you kill further? Sure but because of factors mentioned earlier, the odds would increase against a clean kill and favor a wounding or maiming.

A combo of accuracy, velocity and remaining energy and trajectory. A 357 mag rifle is not going to be a nail driver and when you factor all this together, 100 yards of less is a reasonable limit. Could you kill further? Sure but because of factors mentioned earlier, the odds would increase against a clean kill and favor a wounding or maiming.

I totally agree. I would only use my .357 on Paper or People at 125yds or more...

FWIW: The load I use is a 180gr as-cast bullet. with Lube and GC it comes in at a little over 190.

Here's the external ballistics:

<TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=2 border=2><TBODY><TR><TD>Range (yards)</TD><TD align=middle>Muzzle</TD><TD align=middle>50</TD><TD align=middle>100</TD><TD align=middle>200</TD><TD align=middle>300</TD><TD align=middle>400</TD><TD align=middle>500</TD></TR><TR><TD>Velocity (fps)</TD><TD align=middle>1800 <TD align=middle>1634 <TD align=middle>1481 <TD align=middle>1228 <TD align=middle>1060 <TD align=middle>958 <TD align=middle>884</TD><TR><TD>Energy (ft.-lb.)</TD><TD align=middle>1367 <TD align=middle>1126 <TD align=middle>925 <TD align=middle>636 <TD align=middle>474 <TD align=middle>387 <TD align=middle>330</TD><TR><TD>Trajectory (100 yd. zero)</TD><TD align=middle>-1.5 <TD align=middle>0.9 <TD align=middle>0.0 <TD align=middle>-14.5 <TD align=middle>-52.2 <TD align=middle>-119.9 <TD align=middle>-223.2</TD><TR><TD>Come Up in MOA</TD><TD align=middle>-1.5 <TD align=middle>-1.7 <TD align=middle>0.0 <TD align=middle>6.9 <TD align=middle>16.6 <TD align=middle>28.6 <TD align=middle>42.6</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

So, in theory anyway, I'm still hitting with over 900ftlbs at 100yds... under which 90+% of all medium size game (whitetails) are taken.

Plenty for Medium size game and only a little low for Elk size game....

BTW: Here is the .30-30/30WCF data for the original loading...

<TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=2 border=2><TBODY><TR><TD>Range (yards)</TD><TD align=middle>Muzzle</TD><TD align=middle>50</TD><TD align=middle>100</TD><TD align=middle>200</TD><TD align=middle>300</TD><TD align=middle>400</TD><TD align=middle>500</TD></TR><TR><TD>Velocity (fps)</TD><TD align=middle>1950 <TD align=middle>1827 <TD align=middle>1710 <TD align=middle>1494 <TD align=middle>1308 <TD align=middle>1161 <TD align=middle>1057</TD><TR><TD>Energy (ft.-lb.)</TD><TD align=middle>1393 <TD align=middle>1223 <TD align=middle>1071 <TD align=middle>817 <TD align=middle>627 <TD align=middle>494 <TD align=middle>409</TD><TR><TD>Trajectory (100 yd. zero)</TD><TD align=middle>-1.5 <TD align=middle>0.6 <TD align=middle>0.0 <TD align=middle>-10.5 <TD align=middle>-36.6 <TD align=middle>-83.2 <TD align=middle>-155.4</TD><TR><TD>Come Up in MOA</TD><TD align=middle>-1.5 <TD align=middle>-1.1 <TD align=middle>0.0 <TD align=middle>5.0 <TD align=middle>11.7 <TD align=middle>19.9 <TD align=middle>29.7</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

It gets a whole 150 "extra" ftlbs at 100 yds... and I can't shove the rounds into my Revolver. ;)

A combo of accuracy, velocity and remaining energy and trajectory. A 357 mag rifle is not going to be a nail driver and when you factor all this together, 100 yards of less is a reasonable limit. Could you kill further? Sure but because of factors mentioned earlier, the odds would increase against a clean kill and favor a wounding or maiming.


I've killed game farther than 100 yards with my revolvers on more than one occasion and would certainly expect to do so with a rifle. If I owned a rifle that was not sufficently accurate past 100 yards to take a Deer i believe that I would have to correct that problem....

FPE is not a good indicator of terminal performance IMHO and experience...

True... but after 100yds or so the benefit of a Spitzer - or at least a boat tail - really begin to become apparant.

That's why Hornady put the LeverEvolution in pistol calibers... tosqueeze an extra 50 yds from a 100yd gun.

I honestly get where you are coming from. Uber Profficency with a particular gun means clean kills all out of proportion to the "norm".

But really here, IMO, we're talking about the Norm and Normal shooters.

Would I prefer to use a "better" cartridge? You bet. I'm good to 200yds with Iron Sights on my 1886 .45-70... but Indiana doesn't allow it. SO I use a Pistol Caliber... and since I was already invested in .357 it didn't make sense to me go get into .44/.454 just for afew hundred foot pounds at ranges where I should be shooting 2(+/-) MOA with Irons anyway.

And with that, you can pretty much cleanly kill a Deer with anything.

I killed this Caribou with a 45 Colt 5 1/2" barrel (loaded with 310 grain LFN flat point hard cast loade to 1240 FPS) at approx. 150 yards and yes I hit him with the first shot with complete penetration and the bullet exited


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/00000003.jpg

The key is practice and knowing your sight picture for the yardage....

Darn luck shot at that range because of bullet drop. Old Elmer Keith used to brag about taking game and 300 and 400 yards with a 44 mag walking shots up to game. He was very fond of that round. His bullet designs are still in use today. I would try 150 yard with my 44 without much thought but it has a 10 inch bull barrel and a Leupold scope on it zeroed in at 100 yards too and is very accurate for a revolver. It shoot a 300 grain handload that would be effective well beyond 150 yards if you could gauge the bullet drop correctly. I can remember back in 70's when got my first 44 mag. (one of the first Ruger Super Blackhawks ever made with a very low serial # ) I went to a 100 yard shooting range and was hitting pop cans at 100 yards with it from a bench. I do not know who it surprised more, me or the ones at the range. (I did hide my surprise though)

I dunno... There's Luck and then there's good shooting/practice.

While I still had my 7-1/2" Casull, I was able to CONSISTANTLY hit a n 18" gong at 185yds.... with the 45 ACP cylinder and Factory Irons.

I certainly wouldn't do/try that on Game, but once you have a load dialed in, it's dialed in. If it still has enough Poop when it gets there, then it's a killer.

If JWP can consistantly hit under 6" at 150 with a .44, then it will do the job... can't be any worse than .50 Round Ball at that range - and that is a known killer....

In Wyoming a handgun cartridge must be at least a .35 cal. and have at least 500 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards to be legal. as far as I know .357 mag. is not legal but .357 maximum is. leaving the argument of whether ft/lbs is as important as people say it is, I think you broke the law.


DBL,
I agree. I asked a local game warden if I could use a 357 on antelope one year as I have a Bisley 357 that is very accurate. Was told, "No, it's not big enough." In Wyoming, a 357 is not legal for big game. Obviously, one can become proficient enough to use one successfully, and what's done is done. I'd hate to have someone on this forum spend money on fines unnecessarily, unknowingly thinking he was hunting legally.

Darn luck shot at that range because of bullet drop.


No, it was not a luck shot. I practiced to that range and I used exactly 1/3 of the front sight above the rear just as I did when practicing at that range. No sir it was dedication and practice.... Elmer walked shot in at much greater distance than 150 yards more like 6 to 7 hundred...

I don't consider a successful 150 yard shot to be lucky. You have to practice at all ranges to get to truly know the handgun that you are going to be hunting with.

DBL,
I agree. I asked a local game warden if I could use a 357 on antelope one year as I have a Bisley 357 that is very accurate. Was told, "No, it's not big enough." In Wyoming, a 357 is not legal for big game. Obviously, one can become proficient enough to use one successfully, and what's done is done. I'd hate to have someone on this forum spend money on fines unnecessarily, unknowingly thinking he was hunting legally.


That was the purpose of my post. I personally think the .357 mag is enough gun for deer sized animals, but the Wyoming Game and Fish think differently.

Double post

JWP, my grandson has the Marlin .44 with the rediculous 1 in 38 twist. On top of that it has the Ballard rifling, HOWEVER, it is no deeper then the micro groove. It shoots great at 50 yd's but there is no way I would shoot at a deer past 75 yd's. Boolits go where they want past that. I have worked with it for 2 years and tried every boolit and load. The only way to fix it is to sell it but my grandson loves his gun.
Then after looking at the pictures of damage to a deer, it confirms my liking of a larger caliber in my revolvers. I don't have that mess to clean up and can butcher almost to the holes. I have had that happen with the wrong bullets and backed away from them plus I sold my deer rifle because of the mess it made.
I like to reach a balance between killing fast and clean and making a mess.
I have seen a deer blown up so bad that the heart fell out of the hole in the shoulder. Believe it or not, the deer was shot with a 30-30 by a friend. :eek:
I am too used to arrow shot deer that die in 10 seconds without any bloodshot meat. I HATE bloodshot meat. I don't like to butcher a deer that looks like a semi hit it at 70 MPH. None of you would pick up a roadkill like that but turn around and do the same with a rifle! :confused:

I just joined the forum today to say congratulations on the elk. I wonder how people determine what is "enough gun." Here in Michigan, the county used to hire "sharpshooters" to kill some of the deer in our suburban county parks. I'm not sure if they are with the Department of Natural Resources or not. They do it at night with 22LR's. I have killed two does at about 15 yards with a 40 S&W. Chronographing my loads after the fact, I found they produced only 310 foot pounds of energy. The deer both went about 60 yards. I also shot a pretty big buck with a 35 pound recurve with no problem. It is interesting that people shoot Cape Buffalo with 44 mags and nobody complains, but an elk with a 357 is irresponsible.

Enough gun is based on bullet/boolit performance and where the game is shot. Things change fast as game gets larger.
A smaller caliber and lighter weight bullets can turn things critical fast and proper choices have to be made for penetration without being explosive on smaller animals or not getting in to the boiler room on large ones.
That is why I like the large bores like the .475 because they do not destroy smaller deer yet will kill the largest animals on earth. Big bores are so much easier to work with.
If you look at how much work has been done forever by bullet makers with rifle bullets and all of the premium bullets being designed for all sorts of game you can understand.
Yet you can take a .54 caliber muzzle loader with a round ball and lay almost anything on the ground.
You can kill very large animals with a .22 in the brain but shoot them anywhere else and they are lost. I bet I killed 20 deer in PA that had healed in .22 bullets on the rib cage after going through the lungs. Kind of scary to find a lump in a deer until it is cut open and a bullet drops out.
My answer for enough gun is one that kills every single animal shot without destroying meat AND recovering every animal as long as the shot was placed right. Sure leaves a lot of calibers to choose from, doesn't it?

To T. R., congratulations -- plain and simple.

To others,

I have known T. R. through the web for a few years, mostly with regard to Marlin firearms. He is a hunter, pure and simple. I am reasonably confident there are good reasons the shot was taken at such short range: knowledge of the game, knowledge of the firearm, and hunting ethics, to name a few.

We can all sit at home and acquire knowledge of weapons, ballistics, data, etc. and regurgitate them ad nauseum. To develop skill as a hunter and marksman requires time in the field. To paraphrase Bill Jordan in his gunfighting classic, No Second Place Winner, "Owning a guitar doesn't make you a musician." I assume old Bill meant you need to put in the practice time with the instrument BEFORE you can claim to be a musician, or gunfighter, or hunter.

Time on the range and in the field shines through in this thread.

Well said!

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/HPIM0375.jpg

Well I guess I'm an internet outlaw because I shot a cow elk at 50 feet with a 357 MAG revolver. But damage to organs plus heavy bleeding caused the animal to go down within a fairly short distance. These are facts that won't go away with charts or quotes from experts.

I never shared where the animal was taken.

I actually took this photo of the big bull. It took me over an hour to sneak this close. I was unarmed since I had no tag for this unit but I enjoyed the hunt very much.

Couple years ago, I posted a photo of a big muley I toppled with my 30-30 carbine. One unfriendly person replied that I was just plain lucky to take such a fine animal with an economy rifle. He thought it was unjust. I'm guessing this person doesn't know much about western game animals.

Truthfully, I never intended to create such a battle of words.

Good hunting to all!
TR

Dude, if you can sneak up that close to an elk like that I don't care if you want to hunt with an AtlAtl. It's good with me.

Me too....

Truthfully, I never intended to create such a battle of words.



Sadly there are some "sportsmen" that make themselves feel better about themselves by finding fault with what others have done.

You have my respect for your skills and talent.

Not that that matters either. :o

Sadly there are some "sportsmen" that make themselves feel better about themselves by finding fault with what others have done.

You have my respect for your skills and talent.

Not that that matters either. :o

Sorry but I do not share that view. Doing it was one thing but to suggest that was anything more than a lucky shot that could have had a completely different outcome is irresponsible. You used questionable judgment and you were lucky, nothing more. I am sure elk have been taken with a 22 RF too but that does not make it a elk cartridge either. The old 30-30 consider "anemic" by many as a elk rifle has more punch at 300 yards than a 357 point plank.

I fail to see how a killing shot in the vitails at 50 feet can be classsified as a lucky shot. 50 feet is 16.67 yards that shot is a lock. The gentleman did not take a 100 yard shot at a running animal. The Elk in the picture that was taken is not a large Elk and the shot was location was chosen and properly placed the bullet penetrated to the off side and was found under the hide..
Nothing at all lucky about that

I fail to see how a killing shot in the vitails at 50 feet can be classsified as a lucky shot. 50 feet is 16.67 yards that shot is a lock. The gentleman did not take a 100 yard shot at a running animal. The Elk in the picture that was taken is not a large Elk and the shot was location was chosen and properly placed the bullet penetrated to the off side and was found under the hide..
Nothing at all lucky about that

yep!.. that's the way i see it too..... there was a young guy in a gun shop not that long ago who was talkin .460 this and .500 mag that and all i said was the .357 magnum will take anything in north america... the OLD GUY behind the counter simply said "that's right".........................

way to go,you kept your cool & made a good shot,you didn't try to shoot farther than your shooter was able,as long as a person knows their weapon,it's limitations and your own you can't go wrong.I've taken several deer with mine & it has done a good job.You might want to check out 170grn.speer bullets,
myself & a friend started using them a couple years ago with good effect, he has taken several bear with pistol & rifle (he hunts with dogs) & I've taken a few deer & bear (20yrds on the bear) with mine.(I prefer my .44mag. for bear as my .357 has only a 4 inch barrel & I'm usually shooting at 50yrds or so) the 170s' poke a hole right through doing damage as it goes leaving a good blood trail.excellent job 6 gunner.

way to go,you kept your cool & made a good shot,you didn't try to shoot farther than your shooter was able,as long as a person knows their weapon,it's limitations and your own you can't go wrong.I've taken several deer with mine & it has done a good job.You might want to check out 170grn.speer bullets,
myself & a friend started using them a couple years ago with good effect, he has taken several bear with pistol & rifle (he hunts with dogs) & I've taken a few deer & bear (20yrds on the bear) with mine.(I prefer my .44mag. for bear as my .357 has only a 4 inch barrel & I'm usually shooting at 50yrds or so) the 170s' poke a hole right through doing damage as it goes leaving a good blood trail.excellent job 6 gunner.

Never ceases to amaze me, how many people will tell you something can't be done, after you already went ahead and did it :rolleyes:

How many of you guys who are wagging your finger at this, have ever taken your .357s in the field and used them on game animals? I'll bet darn few.

I wouldn't have used a hollowpoint bullet as a first choice, but have put a cast .357 bullet through both shoulders of a wounded elk. It's still dead.

People turn up their noses at my .35 Rem with cast bullets, too, till they see the blood pouring out of both sides of the critters I've shot with it. Sorta ends the conversation, quick.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/HPIM0375.jpg

Well I guess I'm an internet outlaw because I shot a cow elk at 50 feet with a 357 MAG revolver. But damage to organs plus heavy bleeding caused the animal to go down within a fairly short distance. These are facts that won't go away with charts or quotes from experts.

I never shared where the animal was taken.

TR

I'm pretty sure on page two you said you shot it in Crook County, Wyoming.

Where it is illegal to use a.357 magnum on elk.

You are correct. I did state the animal was taken Crook County, Wyoming. But I'm no crook.

Nearly every year, I take an elk from this unit. Most years, any bull that offers a good shot for my .308 rifle gets tagged. I'm not a trophy hunter although I've taken some big animals over the years.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c146/rushmoreman/Glenfieldroughcountrymuley.jpg

This is a nice muley taken in S. Dakota with 30-30 after a long stalk. Sure, a .308 or 25-06 would've ended the hunt quicker. But the enjoyment of stalking is a pleasure that adds a price-less factor to my hunts.

TR

I fail to see how a killing shot in the vitails at 50 feet can be classsified as a lucky shot. 50 feet is 16.67 yards that shot is a lock. The gentleman did not take a 100 yard shot at a running animal. The Elk in the picture that was taken is not a large Elk and the shot was location was chosen and properly placed the bullet penetrated to the off side and was found under the hide..
Nothing at all lucky about that

Lucky shot! A 357 is not a proper elk cartridge by any stretch. See my whole stink here is not that guy scored but it is still be projected as a proper and acceptable cartridge for this which it is not. It could have had a completely different outcome. (this is why they have most powerful handguns) It is sending the wrong message here. Sure, it can be done but should it? NO!!!!

Proper? Is there an ettiquette chart for what to use on which game animal. LOL! I (personally) don't think an arrow is adequate but people do it all the time. To say something should not be done, something that's BEEN done 100's of times before no less, is simply nonsense. If a guy can get so close and knows his gun/ammo combo intimately and has the skills and patience to make just the right shot, GREAT! Do it and show us the pictures.

Sorry. I just can't seem to bring myself around to your point. I know what you're saying. The animal deserves better. It could have gone bad. This is what I see. Lots or people take bad shots with "proper elk cartriges" and wound an loose the animal. With good shot placement almost anything can be "proper". If you use a sling on a giant and put the rock where it needs to go he's going down.;)

I think all that x # of foot pounds at the muzzle mumbo-jumbo is for those that shoot when they know they shouldn't. Those that don't practice as much as they should. Those that shoot longer than they're capable. For those shots a .357 may just pass through the gut and leave a festering, agonizing wound causing the animal to suffer but that hyper-velocity hollow point just might open up and take some of them guts out the other side with it, maybe making a questionable shot a kill.

It's about knowing your equipment. Mental, physical, and hardware. That's how I see it.

Lucky shot! A 357 is not a proper elk cartridge by any stretch. See my whole stink here is not that guy scored but it is still be projected as a proper and acceptable cartridge for this which it is not. It could have had a completely different outcome. (this is why they have most powerful handguns) It is sending the wrong message here. Sure, it can be done but should it? NO!!!!


People have shot Elk with 338s and lost them, so what does that mean? The fact that the hunter, cartridge, and bullet did its job is proof enough IMHO.. The bullet was found under the hide on the off side, the same as a lot of rifle bullets..

Lucky shot! A 357 is not a proper elk cartridge by any stretch. See my whole stink here is not that guy scored but it is still be projected as a proper and acceptable cartridge for this which it is not. It could have had a completely different outcome. (this is why they have most powerful handguns) It is sending the wrong message here. Sure, it can be done but should it? NO!!!!

He used it.

It worked.

You seem to be all aggravated that whatever cartridge ettiquette you subscribe to, was upset.

Why not take the opportunity to learn something here?

Ever read about the early use of the .357, when it was 'the most powerful handgun on earth?' Have we forgotten something here??????

He used it.

It worked.

You seem to be all aggravated that whatever cartridge ettiquette you subscribe to, was upset.

Why not take the opportunity to learn something here?

Ever read about the early use of the .357, when it was 'the most powerful handgun on earth?' Have we forgotten something here??????


In those days the 357 took larger game than Elk as a mater of fact and it still can when properly loaded and the bullet is properly placed..

In my opinion this is all conjecture. Is the .357 my choice? Not by a long shot, as I carry a .475 Linebaugh. Did it work? Absolutely. And that, is the bottom line. It penetrated as deeply as a lot of rifle bullets do that are running more than 3,000 fps, boasting many more foot-pounds of ME. He had the shot, he took it, placed it well, and a dead elk was the result. Congratulations.

See this link by Dick Metcalf. Read the history of the 357

http://hunting.about.com/od/guns/l/aasthandguncara.htm

This text is near the bottom: "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."

I have read this story in more detail in books/magazines. I remember reading he also used the gun on some African game animals.

The 357 has been a hunting round for 70 years; it requires a more skilled hunter and marksman than those using a rifle.