.357 mag 1 shot stops [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : .357 mag 1 shot stops


1canvas
08-10-2010, 10:32
as i was researching effective pistol calibers and the old .357 125grn comes up as high on the one shot stops. years ago when these statistics were gathered many of those rounds would fragment on impact cause most used .38 special bullets at magnum velocities. with all the bonded bullets and good penetrating rounds we have nowadays i wonder if anything is lost in effectiveness over the older bullets that would frag at high impact speeds. for my 357sig rounds i use Gold Dot .125 grn LE and out of my 32 barrel i get 380+fps. i am thinking i might be better served with the first 2or 3 rounds to be someting like the cor bon 125grn at 1425fps. i think they still use sierra bullets and they would probably frag. any thoughts?

BlutoBlutarsky
08-10-2010, 10:59
The CorBons do shed some petals and weight but still penetrate pretty good. There are pics of the test I did in the 357sig club section.

fredj338
08-10-2010, 11:17
What I worry about in a bullet fragmenting is in really big targets, you are NOT going to adequate penetration. You may only land one decent hit in a gunfight, I don't want a bullet that fails on a forearm or belt buckle. At high vel impacts, there is a place for the bonded bullet.
If COrbon still uses the Sierra, it frags badly @ 1400fps, at least the ones I handload do. Back in the day, people weren't quite as large as those today. When a fragmenting laod failed, then, it failed badly. Hence, bonded bullets we have now.

BlutoBlutarsky
08-10-2010, 12:15
What I worry about in a bullet fragmenting is in really big targets, you are NOT going to adequate penetration. You may only land one decent hit in a gunfight, I don't want a bullet that fails on a forearm or belt buckle. At high vel impacts, there is a place for the bonded bullet.
If COrbon still uses the Sierra, it frags badly @ 1400fps, at least the ones I handload do. Back in the day, people weren't quite as large as those today. When a fragmenting laod failed, then, it failed badly. Hence, bonded bullets we have now.

That's why my first choice is still the 124 XTP.

Gunnut 45/454
08-10-2010, 12:43
Of all the ballistic testing I've seen I have not seen ONE 357 mag bullet get less then 10" of penertration! Not one! Even the very light 110gr! So unless you make it a habit of shooting very large /obese people you should feel confident the 357 Mag is going to get to vitals as long as you hit them! I personnally like the 158 gr in 357 mag ! Your going to get 12-16+ inch penertration! Yes they recoil more but if you ensure the first shot is in the vitals your going to remove the threat quickly! The 357 mag is a stellar SD round in just about any flavor you want to shoot!:supergrin:

LEAD
08-10-2010, 12:57
I had the same question, I think that the majority of bullets now do hold together better than the older styles that built the .357 mag reputation, but they have the edge in penetration.

fredj338
08-10-2010, 13:41
Of all the ballistic testing I've seen I have not seen ONE 357 mag bullet get less then 10" of penertration! Not one! Even the very light 110gr! So unless you make it a habit of shooting very large /obese people you should feel confident the 357 Mag is going to get to vitals as long as you hit them! I personnally like the 158 gr in 357 mag ! Your going to get 12-16+ inch penertration! Yes they recoil more but if you ensure the first shot is in the vitals your going to remove the threat quickly! The 357 mag is a stellar SD round in just about any flavor you want to shoot!:supergrin:
Yeah, but think about the oddeties of a gunfight. My forearm is only 4" across, I'm not a fat/big guy, but that is 4" of muscle & bone. That leaves 6" into vitals, maybe that works, maybe not. Now I've seen some really big guys, 6" forearms or better. A shot through the shoulder on me would likely not reach my heart, again, I am not a big guy. So I'll stick w/ something bonded when IV is likely above 1200fps.

1canvas
08-10-2010, 13:48
What I worry about in a bullet fragmenting is in really big targets, you are NOT going to adequate penetration. You may only land one decent hit in a gunfight, I don't want a bullet that fails on a forearm or belt buckle. At high vel impacts, there is a place for the bonded bullet.
If COrbon still uses the Sierra, it frags badly @ 1400fps, at least the ones I handload do. Back in the day, people weren't quite as large as those today. When a fragmenting laod failed, then, it failed badly. Hence, bonded bullets we have now.

good points.

fredj338
08-10-2010, 14:12
good points.
Unobstructed shots into a ribcage, just about anything works, even the light fast prefrag rounds like a Glaser. Put something in the way though, I want more penetration than 10". The FBI 12" is a good min. It hits the heart on an average man through the side shoulder shot (read Platt shooting).:supergrin:

Gunnut 45/454
08-10-2010, 14:29
fredj338
Well if you use that criteria then most handgun calibers fail! All except 357 mag . 44 mag, 45 LC but these are not carried by most! This is why I've changed my target area from center chest to upper throax! Centerd right at top of breast bone! A hit there hit all the major blood vessals or break the spine lights out ! Or the top of the heart! If I can't hit there I'll take the hips out! :supergrin: Then again I don't see any videos of the BG's doing much in the way of proper shooting stance /protecting them selves!:rofl:

Berto
08-10-2010, 18:49
The .357mag looked awesome back in the day because few rounds did what it did.
Not so much the case anymore.
Personally, I want the bullet to stay together vs fragging.

Gunnut 45/454
08-10-2010, 20:46
Berto
Still looks very good today! Better then the 9mm, 40 short and weak, better then the 357 sig! I know thats going to wrinkle some noses but hey when the truth hurts it hurts!:rofl:

9mm +p+
08-10-2010, 22:08
The .357mag looked awesome back in the day because few rounds did what it did.
Not so much the case anymore.
Personally, I want the bullet to stay together vs fragging.

Typical modern nonsense, oh it's not an auto round so it can't be as effective as the new stuff:upeyes: I hate to burst your bubble but the 357 mag is STILL one of the most effective rounds for a handgun and SD against another human being,period. It's just that most nancy's can't handle it because it kicks and it's loud. I started out in LE in the early 90's and my carry gun was a 4" 686 loaded with Fed 125's, I've used it and I've seen that combo used a total of 3 times and ALL were instant drops and for that matter DRT's. We switched to 9's for more "firepower" and the stops with that round were much less "dramatic" and many more rounds fired affairs. If I could only choose 1 round for SD in a handgun it'd be a 357 bar none.

mikegun
08-10-2010, 22:57
Typical modern nonsense, oh it's not an auto round so it can't be as effective as the new stuff:upeyes: I hate to burst your bubble but the 357 mag is STILL one of the most effective rounds for a handgun and SD against another human being,period. It's just that most nancy's can't handle it because it kicks and it's loud. I started out in LE in the early 90's and my carry gun was a 4" 686 loaded with Fed 125's, I've used it and I've seen that combo used a total of 3 times and ALL were instant drops and for that matter DRT's. We switched to 9's for more "firepower" and the stops with that round were much less "dramatic" and many more rounds fired affairs. If I could only choose 1 round for SD in a handgun it'd be a 357 bar none.

I have to agree with the above i carried a mod 19 for over 20yrs at work, of the 10 ois shootings i personally saw, all were shot dead with one 357mag bullet, some did not die on the spot, but all were stopped with one round...

vanilla_gorilla
08-10-2010, 23:00
I don't know about the Federal loads, but I've tested the Winchester and the Remington 125 grain SJHPs. Both exited my Model 27 at north of 1500 fps, and both fragmented badly with shallow penetration, regardless of the substance it hit. Water, wax, animal; all had the same effect. Out of my 6 inch 586, the Remington round got nearly 1600 fps, and showed more "explosion" than penetration. Very interesting for small varmints, let me tell you. :rofl:


Edit: Only idea how I got such velocity with a 6 inch 586 is maybe a combo of a tight barrel and a very tight B/C gap. It had a gap of less than .003.

fredj338
08-11-2010, 11:06
fredj338
Well if you use that criteria then most handgun calibers fail! All except 357 mag . 44 mag, 45 LC but these are not carried by most! This is why I've changed my target area from center chest to upper throax! Centerd right at top of breast bone! A hit there hit all the major blood vessals or break the spine lights out ! Or the top of the heart! If I can't hit there I'll take the hips out! :supergrin: Then again I don't see any videos of the BG's doing much in the way of proper shooting stance /protecting them selves!:rofl:
Ah, if it were only that simple. Let see, you moving, BG moving, low light, I am thinking your "perfect" shot scenario will be pure luck. Just like guys that say; "two to the chest one to the head", have never really done it under anything but range conditions. Try this: Put a 5" balloon on a 12" string, some wind is desireable. Now draw as you move off your spot, see how many times you can hit the balloon on the move. That will be about half as fast as you'll need to make that perfet hit in real life.:dunno:
As far as "most handgun rounds failing", just not true. Most will get 12" min penetration w/ decent loads, 9mm-45acp. The magnums in full power loadings offer way more performance than needed for the vast majority of SD situations, the 357mag being the most useable.

fastbolt
08-11-2010, 13:13
Even back in the days when we carried .357 Magnum duty revolvers not everyone was necessarily jumping on the bandwagon for the 125gr JHP's. There were still cops using other loads which worked well for them. I even remember one of the larger local agencies where one of their guys shot an armed suspect with a 158gr soft point which reportedly not only dropped the suspect where he stood, but it expanded to a mushroom shape and remained in the body. You never know.

There was at least one well known and respected author/instructor who discussed in a couple of his articles that I remember what he considered to be the potential for over penetration of the 125gr Magnum loads in human attackers. Like I said, you just never know.

I was talking with a retired cop who went to work for one of the ammo companies, and the subject of the venerable .357 Magnum wheelgun came up. He said he remembered the head of his office came up to him asking why they weren't switching to the new 125gr Magnum load being talked about. He said he asked his boss what problems their long time current load had exhibited in their various shootings (which apparently involved a lot of situations in & around veh's). He said his boss stopped to think about it, realized they'd had excellent luck with their chosen load to date and decided he didn't see any reason to rush out and their change ammunition, after all.

Yes, another well respected cop/writer published some personally gathered statistics and started writing about one shot stops which cast a favorable light on the 125gr JHP load and probably help develop its reputation back then.

One large fed agency certainly felt it was a very effective load, as well.

Some cops liked the 110gr JHP's, too ... and some didn't. It depended to whom you listened and what the preferences and experiences of those folks might be, too. Then there was the 110gr +P+ .38 load which developed a following to some extent. It probably helped that it was a rather easy shooting load when fired out of at least a K-frame duty gun. I know a guy who carried that load for a few years, and I later had the opportunity to help burn up several thousands of rounds of it when an allied agency decided to burn up its remaining stock of that load when it transitioned from revolvers to pistols. :)

While I used some of the different 125gr loads (Rem 125gr SJHP and both the Federal standard JHP and their 125gr Nyclad Magnum load), I actually came to prefer the 140-145gr loads. I came full circle, so to speak, since I liked the Speer 140gr bullet in a stout handload before I entered LE work, and I looked for it in the factory load after I got hired and was restricted to factory loaded ammunition for on & off-duty. Speer and Remington each had a 140gr load back then, and then W-W had their 145gr STHP load.

I attended a couple of wound ballistics seminars several years ago, taught by a former DOD agent who used to be tasked with investigating shootings involving certain fed situations. I found it interesting regarding what he had to say about the .357 Magnum as a duty caliber. Basically, while he felt the 125gr JHP had started to develop a decent record as a defensive load, he felt that if the Magnum revolver had remained in service for at least a few years longer, that the 140gr JHP load would probably had eclipsed it as the optimal load of choice. He described the 140gr load, such as Remington's SJHP bullet load, as offering the perceived advantages of the lighter weight 125gr load, but having the advantage of delivering the ballistic performance slightly deeper than the 125gr loads might. Naturally, it was just his opinion, based upon his experience, but I found that interesting.

I still have a fair amount of 125gr loads which I've carried in my remaining steel Magnum revolvers, as well as some heavier bullet loads, including some remaining Rem 140gr SJHP loads. ;)

I wish they'd had the 7 & 8 round S&W revolvers available back when I was carrying a revolver on-duty. ;)

I wouldn't feel under-equipped with a 7 or 8-shot Magnum revolver even today ... and after they took away my Magnum revolver I carried various issued pistols chambered in 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP, of variable magazine capacities. I finally accepted that the 9's & .40's were fine service calibers, especially with the newer bullet design developments ... but personally, I still consider the .357 Magnum to be a fine choice when it comes to a serious medium-bore defensive handgun caliber.

Not everyone can shoot it as well as they might wish, however, as it requires more of the shooter than the lower recoiling .38 S&W Special +P loads.

Just my thoughts.

1canvas
08-11-2010, 13:13
Ah, if it were only that simple. Let see, you moving, BG moving, low light, I am thinking your "perfect" shot scenario will be pure luck. Just like guys that say; "two to the chest one to the head", have never really done it under anything but range conditions. Try this: Put a 5" balloon on a 12" string, some wind is desireable. Now draw as you move off your spot, see how many times you can hit the balloon on the move. That will be about half as fast as you'll need to make that perfet hit in real life.:dunno:
As far as "most handgun rounds failing", just not true. Most will get 12" min penetration w/ decent loads, 9mm-45acp. The magnums in full power loadings offer way more performance than needed for the vast majority of SD situations, the 357mag being the most useable.

fredj338 you put it very well, i could not have said it any better.
that is my concideration when selecting a defense round. i too think COM hits may be unlikely when you concider all the variables you described plus the mental stress of all parties involved. i also think your best chance for that good hit may be your first shot. i want all the horse power i can handle accurately with the best most reliably penatrating, destructive bullet.

fredj338
08-11-2010, 13:23
fredj338 you put it very well, i could not have said it any better.
that is my concideration when selecting a defense round. i too think COM hits may be unlikely when you concider all the variables you described plus the mental stress of all parties involved. i also think your best chance for that good hit may be your first shot. i want all the horse power i can handle accurately with the best most reliably penatrating, destructive bullet.

Yeah, why I shun the sub 9mm rounds for SD. You may get one hit only in a fluid gunfight. Too many think it's like the range or an IDPA match where the BG isn't moving or shooting back. I'ld like to think I can make headshots or upper thorax hits on demand form any angle under poor light while ducking bullets, but I am a realist.:supergrin: I also know mag cap is over blown. I can't use covering fire to move, I have to account for all my shots. So hopefully you make a big enough hole in the BG w/ that one round you land to end the fight sooner than later. So in Kommiefornia, where I can only have 10, I want 10 big ones.:dunno:

fastbolt
08-11-2010, 13:27
Intervening limbs and oblique angles of presentation are probably always going to present a potential challenge, to some degree, when it comes to situations involving some defensive (LE) shootings.

I can think of a shooting involving another agency where a couple of 180gr JHP .40 S&W loads of older design struck an armed suspect actively shooting at a cop in a 'dynamic' situation. The cop was described to me as a well-skilled shooter (including some military experience and skills gained in SF) who placed 2 rounds on the attacker (of 2 rounds fired). One hit the lower torso, expanded and remained in the body. The other struck an intervening arm, was deflected along the bone of the upper arm and remained in the shoulder capsule. A cop who saw the bullet recovered from the arm/shoulder during surgery described it as hugely mushroomed, FWIW.

You never know.

Berto
08-11-2010, 17:45
Typical modern nonsense, oh it's not an auto round so it can't be as effective as the new stuff:upeyes: I hate to burst your bubble but the 357 mag is STILL one of the most effective rounds for a handgun and SD against another human being,period. It's just that most nancy's can't handle it because it kicks and it's loud. I started out in LE in the early 90's and my carry gun was a 4" 686 loaded with Fed 125's, I've used it and I've seen that combo used a total of 3 times and ALL were instant drops and for that matter DRT's. We switched to 9's for more "firepower" and the stops with that round were much less "dramatic" and many more rounds fired affairs. If I could only choose 1 round for SD in a handgun it'd be a 357 bar none.

:rofl:

You're right, .40 S@W, .357SIG and .45acp can't do what the .357mag does.

(I'm a revolver guy, BTW)

BlutoBlutarsky
08-11-2010, 18:43
When I carried a revolver it was usually a 4" 686 or 4" Security Six with the old 125gr Fed load. There was a big difference in that load from a 4" to a snubbie. Now that I carry an auto the 357 Sig gives me better velocity from my G33 than the Mag from an SP101, plus it is much more manageable in the recoil and quick second shot dept. If I had to go back to a revolver it would be a 4" .357 mag.

NAC
08-11-2010, 22:01
Three words... Trooper Mark Coates.... RIP Although I think he was using 145 grain, don't trust any round to give you a one shot stop.

Edit- Forgot to mention, I'm a big fan of .357 ballistics. I personally choose capacity over ballistics though with that said my round of choice is the .357 SIG 125 grain Double Taps if I can afford them. YMMV

BOGE
08-11-2010, 23:08
Everyone has a ``plan`` until the shooting begins.

NAC
08-11-2010, 23:26
Everyone has a ``plan`` until the shooting begins.

Yup, which is why I like more than 5 rounds on board ready to go. I think the miss rate is around 80% in OIS's and that's with somewhat trained individuals. Just my opinion, I harbor no ill will to those that choose a wheel gun. I own a few myself.

Bert Man
08-13-2010, 13:20
I totally agree with the other experienced LE posters here regarding the terminal effectiveness of the traditional 357 125JHP rounds by Federal and Remington in a 4" inch revolver. They were achieving 96% one shot incapacitation with COM hits. In my experience regarding the several occasions my agency actually employed them the results were most conclusive. Yes, both rounds would sometimes partially fragment, but only after penetrating just short of exiting the far side of the suspect's body. I beleive that would be considered to be nearly perfect performance. Although that was in the 1970's-80's I haven't noticed that human physiology has changed to any significant degree since.

I also like several of the other loadings such as the 140-145 gr. in the 357. The round was and is one of the most effective handgun cartiridges available. With all that being said a number of the newer cartridges available today are very close in effectiveness. When my agency switched from the 4" S&W Model 66 to the Glock 21 45ACP I didn't feel any less effectively armed. There is plenty of excellent ammo being produced in various calibers today.

fredj338
08-13-2010, 13:26
I totally agree with the other experienced LE posters here regarding the terminal effectiveness of the traditional 357 125JHP rounds by Federal and Remington in a 4" inch revolver. They were achieving 96% one shot incapacitation with COM hits. In my experience regarding the several occasions my agency actually employed them the results were most conclusive. Yes, both rounds would sometimes partially fragment, but only after penetrating just short of exiting the far side of the suspect's body. I beleive that would be considered to be nearly perfect performance. Although that was in the 1970's-80's I haven't noticed that human physiology has changed to any significant degree since. I also like several of the other loadings such as the 140-145 gr. in the 357. The round was and is one of the most effective handgun cartiridges available. With all that being said a number of the newer cartridges available today are very close in effectiveness. When my agency switched from the 4" S&W Model 66 to the Glock 21 45ACP I didn't feel any less effectively armed. There is plenty of excellent ammo being produced in various calibers today.
So you've not noticed the growing number of really large people lately? Something like 30% of the population is labeled obese today! 30yrs ago, it was less than 10%. NOpe, the population is certainly getting larger which means BGs are getting larger. Again, if I am only landing one good hit, like fb noted, I want it to dig as deep as possible.:dunno:

G21FAN
08-13-2010, 13:52
Three words... Trooper Mark Coates.... RIP Although I think he was using 145 grain, don't trust any round to give you a one shot stop.

Edit- Forgot to mention, I'm a big fan of .357 ballistics. I personally choose capacity over ballistics though with that said my round of choice is the .357 SIG 125 grain Double Taps if I can afford them. YMMV

My understanding after studying the AAR of that incident is that his revolver was loaded with 110 grn +P+ .38 Specials.

Little Joe
08-13-2010, 13:52
So you've not noticed the growing number of really large people lately? Something like 30% of the population is labeled obese today! 30yrs ago, it was less than 10%. NOpe, the population is certainly getting larger which means BGs are getting larger. Again, if I am only landing one good hit, like fb noted, I want it to dig as deep as possible.:dunno:

So which do you like Fred the 125gr Gold Dot or the 158gr Gold Dot for self defense?

Bert Man
08-13-2010, 14:27
So you've not noticed the growing number of really large people lately? Something like 30% of the population is labeled obese today! 30yrs ago, it was less than 10%. NOpe, the population is certainly getting larger which means BGs are getting larger. Again, if I am only landing one good hit, like fb noted, I want it to dig as deep as possible.:dunno:

Fred338, yes people have put on some extra pounds over the years but there were some fat people back then and they fell about as quickly as skinny ones with the 357. I am not going to pick nits with you here. I know what I have experienced over the years working the streets and training officers. I HAVE BEEN THERE, have you? Do you have experience in law enforcement/medical examiner/ trauma care? It is obvious that our opinions differ on this topic and that's okay. We are all entitled to our own beliefs. If you read my original post closely you would have seen that I conceded that some very effective new ammo is being produced today. Because of that many handgun calibers are very effective today. You choose what is best for you and I'll choose whats best for me. There's plenty of good stuff out there for all of us.

BOGE
08-13-2010, 17:34
...They were achieving 96% one shot incapacitation with COM hits...

Thatīs a Marshall & Sanow statistic and although I cruise Marshall's website and generally agree with him there were many who questioned the method gathering.

FWIW, I shot a lot of Fed. 125 gr. Mags. in the 80's in a 3 in. revolver. What a handful it was!! :wow: Personally, I believe it was probably THE best SD .357 round ever conceived.

mastrbloata
08-13-2010, 18:38
Fred338, yes people have put on some extra pounds over the years but there were some fat people back then and they fell about as quickly as skinny ones with the 357. I am not going to pick nits with you here. I know what I have experienced over the years working the streets and training officers. I HAVE BEEN THERE, have you? Do you have experience in law enforcement/medical examiner/ trauma care? It is obvious that our opinions differ on this topic and that's okay. We are all entitled to our own beliefs. If you read my original post closely you would have seen that I conceded that some very effective new ammo is being produced today. Because of that many handgun calibers are very effective today. You choose what is best for you and I'll choose whats best for me. There's plenty of good stuff out there for all of us.

Well Bert, sounds like you have a lot of experience on the matter from actually being there. Let me ask you something though, respectfully of course...If 10 percent of the population was fat back then and the fat people fell as quickly as the skinny ones according to what you describe, doesn't it stand to reason that a whole lot less fat people were being shot with 125gr. .357 then when the population contained 10% obese people than if they were being shot today with a population of 30% of people being fat now with 125gr .357? Another words, the variable of peoples weight and density has changed dramatically and if the # of chubby subjects being shot was a hell of a lot less than they are today, it doesn't seem that you could possibly know that because it worked so well on a much smaller number of obese subjects then, that it will work as well statistically on fat people today simply by virtue of the fact that there are so many more of them now than there were then. Please understand that I'm not trying to be a wise guy here. The difference between 10% and 30% of a population numerically is huge though.

Bert Man
08-13-2010, 19:04
Thatīs a Marshall & Sanow statistic and although I cruise Marshall's website and generally agree with him there were many who questioned the method gathering.

FWIW, I shot a lot of Fed. 125 gr. Mags. in the 80's in a 3 in. revolver. What a handful it was!! :wow: Personally, I believe it was probably THE best SD .357 round ever conceived.

I believe you are right about being Marshall/Sanow stat. Back then they were about all we had and don't doubt their figures may have been somewhat optimistic. Was a super round back in the day and is still is though there are others of more recent issue in several calibers which are at least as effective. Yes the 125 is definitely a handful, not for everybody, but when you train and qualify with it over a period of time it seems much less formidable. Definitely little slower on follow-up shots than 9mm/.45 though. Honestly, these days I don't shoot much 125 gr. in order to preserve the forcing cone on my old Model 66-1, usually shoot Win 145 STHP. In fact, since retiring I mostly carry aGlock 19 w/Fed HST or j-frame with Rem. 158+P SWCHP and feel confident they will do the job. I believe one should carry whatever reasonable weapon/ammo package HE feels secure with, after all, every firearm is a backup gun, the primary weapon is found from the neck up.

Bert Man
08-13-2010, 19:43
Well Bert, sounds like you have a lot of experience on the matter from actually being there. Let me ask you something though, respectfully of course...If 10 percent of the population was fat back then and the fat people fell as quickly as the skinny ones according to what you describe, doesn't it stand to reason that a whole lot less fat people were being shot with 125gr. .357 then when the population contained 10% obese people than if they were being shot today with a population of 30% of people being fat now with 125gr .357? Another words, the variable of peoples weight and density has changed dramatically and if the # of chubby subjects being shot was a hell of a lot less than they are today, it doesn't seem that you could possibly know that because it worked so well on a much smaller number of obese subjects then, that it will work as well statistically on fat people today simply by virtue of the fact that there are so many more of them now than there were then. Please understand that I'm not trying to be a wise guy here. The difference between 10% and 30% of a population numerically is huge though.

Mastrbloata, I won't even attempt to say that I understand everything you just said about this;my head is still spinning trying to digest your convoluted premise(ha). It seems that we may be trying to compare two somewhat different statistical groups to make an equal comparison. I don't know if we can specifically do so. I do know that I have seen several persons of rather large body mass shot with 357 125 gr. and all were neutralized in an efficient manner. That, of course, was in the "old days". Since I have not shot any fat people lately I can't accurately compare the effects of the round in question on both statistical groups. Anyone who has had real world experience as to the likelyhood of a one-shot-stop with the 357 Mag in just about any configuration knows that has frequently been an effective stopper. I believe that it was and still is. If you have read my other posts in this thread you will see that I don,t think it is the only platform adequate for effective armed defense, but it is without a doubt one of the best.

Thanks for your informative and entertaining argument. I get what you are driving at and like the way you posed it. By the way, statistics are not always accurate; I happen to be of smaller body size than 30 years ago but am definitely going to shoot myself to see how fat I am or am not today. Cheers.

Bert Man
08-13-2010, 19:47
Well Bert, sounds like you have a lot of experience on the matter from actually being there. Let me ask you something though, respectfully of course...If 10 percent of the population was fat back then and the fat people fell as quickly as the skinny ones according to what you describe, doesn't it stand to reason that a whole lot less fat people were being shot with 125gr. .357 then when the population contained 10% obese people than if they were being shot today with a population of 30% of people being fat now with 125gr .357? Another words, the variable of peoples weight and density has changed dramatically and if the # of chubby subjects being shot was a hell of a lot less than they are today, it doesn't seem that you could possibly know that because it worked so well on a much smaller number of obese subjects then, that it will work as well statistically on fat people today simply by virtue of the fact that there are so many more of them now than there were then. Please understand that I'm not trying to be a wise guy here. The difference between 10% and 30% of a population numerically is huge though.
CORRECTION: I meant I was NOT going to shoot mself to find ou. Ha!
Mastrbloata, I won't even attempt to say that I understand everything you just said about this;my head is still spinning trying to digest your convoluted premise(ha). It seems that we may be trying to compare two somewhat different statistical groups to make an equal comparison. I don't know if we can specifically do so. I do know that I have seen several persons of rather large body mass shot with 357 125 gr. and all were neutralized in an efficient manner. That, of course, was in the "old days". Since I have not shot any fat people lately I can't accurately compare the effects of the round in question on both statistical groups. Anyone who has had real world experience as to the likelyhood of a one-shot-stop with the 357 Mag in just about any configuration knows that has frequently been an effective stopper. I believe that it was and still is. If you have read my other posts in this thread you will see that I don,t think it is the only platform adequate for effective armed defense, but it is without a doubt one of the best.

Thanks for your informative and entertaining argument. I get what you are driving at and like the way you posed it. By the way, statistics are not always accurate; I happen to be of smaller body size than 30 years ago but am definitely going to shoot myself to see how fat I am or am not today. Cheers.

Little Joe
08-13-2010, 21:39
Any worries of a 158gr 357 going straight through and continuing down range? I have no proof of that happening or not. I'm just wondering. I suspect it is a reasonable concern with a bonded bullet.


LJ

mastrbloata
08-13-2010, 22:30
Bert, I most certainly wouldn't want you to shoot yourself!:cool: Thanks for the reply. It's really not that convoluted; simply put, 30 years ago say, if we agree that 10% of the population was obese, we can also agree (loosely) that one out of ten people shot with .357 125gr. by LE was obese. Now, at present, we can also agree that 30% of all LE shootings are on big, fat, fatties, yes? That would change the dynamic dramatically pertaining to the round and how it affects the percentage # of drops, yes? There's a 20% increase of the "shot" of lard asses by LE as opposed to back in the "good old days." A 20% increase in the weight and density of subjects shot with .357 125gr. in the American population would amount to many more obese being shot by LE, thus changing the statistical dynamic of the round's effectiveness. Of course, we'll never know for sure because no one uses .357 mag, 125gr. in LE anymore but it seems to me at least, trying to qualify the effectiveness of a round back when the population was 10% obese as opposed to what it is now at 30%, is painting with a very broad brush. Am I wrong?

Bert Man
08-13-2010, 23:27
Bert, I most certainly wouldn't want you to shoot yourself!:cool: Thanks for the reply. It's really not that convoluted; simply put, 30 years ago say, if we agree that 10% of the population was obese, we can also agree (loosely) that one out of ten people shot with .357 125gr. by LE was obese. Now, at present, we can also agree that 30% of all LE shootings are on big, fat, fatties, yes? That would change the dynamic dramatically pertaining to the round and how it affects the percentage # of drops, yes? There's a 20% increase of the "shot" of lard asses by LE as opposed to back in the "good old days." A 20% increase in the weight and density of subjects shot with .357 125gr. in the American population would amount to many more obese being shot by LE, thus changing the statistical dynamic of the round's effectiveness. Of course, we'll never know for sure because no one uses .357 mag, 125gr. in LE anymore but it seems to me at least, trying to qualify the effectiveness of a round back when the population was 10% obese as opposed to what it is now at 30%, is painting with a very broad brush. Am I wrong?

No, I don't think we can exactly come to that conclusion. Can agree that 10% of the population may have been obese 30 years ago and 30 % possibly are today but we can't be sure of what percentage of actual criminals were large then and now. We would first have to know what percentage of the population are violent felons in both time periods. We would then have to know what percentage of criminals were/or are fat. We also cannot predict how many of these hypothetical fat criminals would be involved in a deadly force situation. Such incidents do not occur in a predictable or linear manner so you are right about one thing; we will never know. I do know with certainty that a 357 Mag of just about any configuration works very wellthen and now. So does 9mm/.357 Sig,/.40 S&W/45ACP and several others with quality ammo. Hopefully none of us will ever have to find out which is best.

It's been fun, but I think we are beginning to flagellate a decesased equine with this thread. It is also past this non-fatty's bedtime; got to get out of here.:yawn:

fredj338
08-14-2010, 01:51
Fred338, yes people have put on some extra pounds over the years but there were some fat people back then and they fell about as quickly as skinny ones with the 357. I am not going to pick nits with you here. I know what I have experienced over the years working the streets and training officers. I HAVE BEEN THERE, have you? Do you have experience in law enforcement/medical examiner/ trauma care? It is obvious that our opinions differ on this topic and that's okay. We are all entitled to our own beliefs. If you read my original post closely you would have seen that I conceded that some very effective new ammo is being produced today. Because of that many handgun calibers are very effective today. You choose what is best for you and I'll choose whats best for me. There's plenty of good stuff out there for all of us.
No disrespect to the been there done that guys, but unless you were involved in or personnaly witnessed shootings, your exp level would be not much more than my non LEO. Really, my dad was 20yr LEA, never fired his gun in anger. I have many friends going on 20yrs LE, never fired there guns in SD. So you "being there" doesn't mean you should disrespect others or expect credability just by virtue of your previous job.
Fact, people today are quite a bit larger than people 20-25yrs ago. I am NOT saying the 125grJHP load is a bad stopper, not at all, used to carry it in my snub, but shoot enough things w/ it & you'll see some downside to shallower penetration. Today I prefer the 145grWSTHP in my snub, even better in a 4".
http://www.answers.com/topic/in-the-united-states-what-is-the-average-height-and-weight-for-a-man-and-a-woman
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/06/29/report-adult-obesity/
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,980476,00.html
Now you may not consider 45# AVG larger guy significant, but that means there are a bunch of dudes out there that are going well over 200#. Criminals coming out of any significant time in prison today are coming out w/ a lot of muscle to go along w/ their attitude. Again, not saying the 125grJHP doesn't work & probably well in most cases. I only take issue w/ your statement that you haven't noticed the avg guy being larger today. You'ld have to be living in a small town in the mountains somewher to not notice how huge people are getting today.

BOGE
08-14-2010, 08:44
...Since I have not shot any fat people lately...

:rofl:

mastrbloata
08-14-2010, 09:07
No, I don't think we can exactly come to that conclusion. Can agree that 10% of the population may have been obese 30 years ago and 30 % possibly are today but we can't be sure of what percentage of actual criminals were large then and now. We would first have to know what percentage of the population are violent felons in both time periods. We would then have to know what percentage of criminals were/or are fat. We also cannot predict how many of these hypothetical fat criminals would be involved in a deadly force situation. Such incidents do not occur in a predictable or linear manner so you are right about one thing; we will never know. I do know with certainty that a 357 Mag of just about any configuration works very wellthen and now. So does 9mm/.357 Sig,/.40 S&W/45ACP and several others with quality ammo. Hopefully none of us will ever have to find out which is best.

It's been fun, but I think we are beginning to flagellate a decesased equine with this thread. It is also past this non-fatty's bedtime; got to get out of here.:yawn: Sweeet dreams.:wavey:

bogey3737
08-14-2010, 14:15
140 gr New Loads:

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=106

txoilman
08-14-2010, 15:34
I lean towards the ole man, the 145 grain silvertip. The baby aced the FBI tests from day one, has flash suppressed powder and hits 1200+ from my snub.

Yes, it is an old design, its loud and it bucks. But having 30 years of 'it works' means a lot to me. Six round of --- holy $#@! -- is likely enough for anyone not hanging out on gang turf with light bubbles on top their car.

One thought though, don't try this in the house -- loud is an understatement.
:wavey:

mastrbloata
08-14-2010, 15:50
I lean towards the ole man, the 145 grain silvertip. The baby aced the FBI tests from day one, has flash suppressed powder and hits 1200+ from my snub.

Yes, it is an old design, its loud and it bucks. But having 30 years of 'it works' means a lot to me. Six round of --- holy $#@! -- is likely enough for anyone not hanging out on gang turf with light bubbles on top their car.

One thought though, don't try this in the house -- loud is an understatement.
:wavey:

Now that's something I happen to have boxes and boxes of laying around. I used to get them for $15.00 a 50 box. The retailer said they were something a LEA rolled out of. It's pretty mild (I think) out of my 2-1/4" SP-101.

Bert Man
08-14-2010, 20:49
No disrespect to the been there done that guys, but unless you were involved in or personnaly witnessed shootings, your exp level would be not much more than my non LEO. Really, my dad was 20yr LEA, never fired his gun in anger. I have many friends going on 20yrs LE, never fired there guns in SD. So you "being there" doesn't mean you should disrespect others or expect credability just by virtue of your previous job.
Fact, people today are quite a bit larger than people 20-25yrs ago. I am NOT saying the 125grJHP load is a bad stopper, not at all, used to carry it in my snub, but shoot enough things w/ it & you'll see some downside to shallower penetration. Today I prefer the 145grWSTHP in my snub, even better in a 4".
http://www.answers.com/topic/in-the-united-states-what-is-the-average-height-and-weight-for-a-man-and-a-woman
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/06/29/report-adult-obesity/
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,980476,00.html
Now you may not consider 45# AVG larger guy significant, but that means there are a bunch of dudes out there that are going well over 200#. Criminals coming out of any significant time in prison today are coming out w/ a lot of muscle to go along w/ their attitude. Again, not saying the 125grJHP doesn't work & probably well in most cases. I only take issue w/ your statement that you haven't noticed the avg guy being larger today. You'ld have to be living in a small town in the mountains somewher to not notice how huge people are getting today.

Fred, I will try to put this thing to rest as best I can. Regarding my assertion of "been there" in regard to the stopping effects of 357 Mag. 125 gr. I will offer that I was a sworn police officer for 31 years. For several years during the mid 1970's I was assigned as a criminal investigator and it was my duty to investigate shooting incidents by both police and civilians. This covered investigation at the scene, emergency rooms, autopsies, and court proceedings. In those instances where the 357 125gr. was used stopping effects were pretty conclusive in many cases. Not perfect, but usually effective. Now, I am glad your father never had to fire his weapon in the line duty. I can tell you is not a pleasant thing to do even in lawful self defense.
I don't find it appropriate to discuss my personal experience other than as I stated earlier " I have been there." I hope I came to know a little more about deadly force incidents than the average non-LEO. If I haven't I let my department and my fellow citizens down. Don't know it all but do know some.

If you will re-read my original post you see that I did not claim that people were just as large 30 years ago. What I said was I was not of the opinion that human physiology had changed much since then. I know we have some mighty obese specimens today, after all, I live in the #1 fattest state in the nation and they are everywhere. By human physiology I was referring not specifically to obesity(body mass) but skeletal make-up, limbs, organs, nerves, and body fluids. I don't think those things have changed to a significant degree over the years. Perhaps I should have factored in body mass more than I did. I am still convinced that the cartridge under discussion was and likely still is effective. Not saying it is the only good one or that there may not be some better. I am not 'lost in the fifties" and am fully aware that much of the ammo produced today is way beyond the average of years past. I hardly use 125gr. anymore for the sake of the forcing cone on my old M66-1. As a matter of fact, I usually load with Win 145STHP these days. Hope I answered some of your questions. You challenged me to back up my assertions and I appreciate that. Nice to banter with a thinking man such as you and Mastrbloater. Time to put this thread to rest, I am worn out.:dunno::deadhorse::yawn:

fredj338
08-15-2010, 13:40
Fred, I will try to put this thing to rest as best I can. Regarding my assertion of "been there" in regard to the stopping effects of 357 Mag. 125 gr. I will offer that I was a sworn police officer for 31 years. For several years during the mid 1970's I was assigned as a criminal investigator and it was my duty to investigate shooting incidents by both police and civilians. This covered investigation at the scene, emergency rooms, autopsies, and court proceedings. In those instances where the 357 125gr. was used stopping effects were pretty conclusive in many cases. Not perfect, but usually effective. Now, I am glad your father never had to fire his weapon in the line duty. I can tell you is not a pleasant thing to do even in lawful self defense.
I don't find it appropriate to discuss my personal experience other than as I stated earlier " I have been there." I hope I came to know a little more about deadly force incidents than the average non-LEO. If I haven't I let my department and my fellow citizens down. Don't know it all but do know some.

If you will re-read my original post you see that I did not claim that people were just as large 30 years ago. What I said was I was not of the opinion that human physiology had changed much since then. I know we have some mighty obese specimens today, after all, I live in the #1 fattest state in the nation and they are everywhere. By human physiology I was referring not specifically to obesity(body mass) but skeletal make-up, limbs, organs, nerves, and body fluids. I don't think those things have changed to a significant degree over the years. Perhaps I should have factored in body mass more than I did. I am still convinced that the cartridge under discussion was and likely still is effective. Not saying it is the only good one or that there may not be some better. I am not 'lost in the fifties" and am fully aware that much of the ammo produced today is way beyond the average of years past. I hardly use 125gr. anymore for the sake of the forcing cone on my old M66-1. As a matter of fact, I usually load with Win 145STHP these days. Hope I answered some of your questions. You challenged me to back up my assertions and I appreciate that. Nice to banter with a thinking man such as you and Mastrbloater. Time to put this thread to rest, I am worn out.:dunno::deadhorse::yawn:
Then we certainly agree or than we disagree.:wavey: