# .357 vs .44 (Smith & Wesson)



## Kane (Jul 31, 2006)

Which gun do you think is better for self defence between the .357 magnum and the .44 magnum? I assume that since the .44 is made at a later time that it would be more advanced. But I have heard of cases where the .357 outclasses the .44 still.

What do you guys think? And which gun packs a bigger punch (which gun is more powerful)?


----------



## pstarr (Jul 31, 2006)

I think the .44 mag is clearly the most powerful...but self-defense is a relative term.  Do you mean on the street, in your home, in your car...?

 Honestly, I wouldn't use either round for self-defense since if you miss, the slug is going to go somewhere and both the .357 and .44 go a LONG way!    

     For general purpose defense, I recommend the .45.  Slower moving and it'll knock a man down even if it wings him.  But it won't go clear through your neighbor's house...


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Jul 31, 2006)

.357 mag no question about it in my opinion.  The 125 gr. hollowpoint has proven itself as a great "manstopper" as far as handgun ammo goes.  It's also easier to shoot that the .44 mag, and is much less likely to blast through a body and find itself somwhere it shouldn't be.  For me, .44 mag is a hunting round.

But I'm sure other people will have different opinions.

Jeff


----------



## Grenadier (Jul 31, 2006)

As a manstopper, the .357 magnum has certainly earned its praises, and probably about as effective as a handgun caliber gets.  The classic 125 grain jacketed hollowpoint load that flings the bullet at 1400+ fps has had a very good track record.  This is something that both the Marshall / Sanow crowd and the Fackler crowd can agree, it seems.  

A .44 magnum is certainly more powerful.  Just as a comparison, a .44 magnum can launch a 250 grain bullet (twice the weight of the above mentioned .357 magnum) to the same velocities as the above load.  If anything, the heavier loads are great for hunting, even up to a black bear.  However, for manstopping abilities, there's no advantage.  

Keep in mind, though, that full power loads in the .357 magnum, and certainly the .44 magnum, are going to kick a good bit.  In these cases, where people might be recoil sensitive, the .357 magnum will have the advantage.  For folks that can't even stand that, Remington does make a medium velocity .357 magnum load that duplicates the feel of a hot 9 mm load (125 grain bullet, 1200 fps).  Easy recoiling, for certain, compared to a full house .357 magnum.  

For those that can't even stand that, they can always fire .38 Special cartridges out of a .357 magnum revolver, or .44 Special cartridges out of a .44 magnum revolver.  Both can still be decent manstoppers, especially the .44 Special.


----------



## KenpoTex (Aug 1, 2006)

Unless you're really big or have a LOT of practice, most people won't be able to handle the recoil of a .44 as a defensive gun when loaded with magnum ammunition.  With .44 specials, you've got a pretty good package.  For what it's worth, I believe that Clint Smith, owner of Thunder Ranch, carries a .44.

Overall though, I'd go with the .357.  IMO, it's a more versatile round, it's cheaper to buy ammo for, and the weapon itself will probably be cheaper than a comparable .44.


----------



## Carol (Aug 1, 2006)

I'd rather be extremely precise with a 9mm than reasonably good with a .44.  

Accuracy is final


----------



## Kane (Aug 1, 2006)

So is the .44 Smith and Wesson Magnum considered the strongest handgun? It came out a few decades ago and I would think a more powerful revolver handgun should have been created by now.

BTW, how does the .44 magnum and other stronger handguns compare to the strongest rifles (in strength)?


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Aug 1, 2006)

The .44 magnum came out in the fifties thanks to Elmer Keith.  There are many more powerful handgun rounds out now.  One of the latest being the 
.500 S&W.  Good for bringing down big game.

Most rifle rounds are more powerful than the most powerful handgun round.  Some very much so.  As Clint Smith says, a handgun is something you use to fight your way back to the rifle or shotgun you should have had with you in the first place.  Also a heck of a lot easier to shoot well.

Jeff


----------



## Lisa (Aug 1, 2006)

I have shot a .357 (my husbands) and then shot his friendss Desert Eagle (.44).   The .357 was easier (for me) then the .44.  The Desert Eagle was HUGE!  It was waving all of the place for me and my accuracy was not the greatest (not that it was to begin with but.... )


----------



## OUMoose (Aug 1, 2006)

To the OP's question fFrom a home defence or personal defence standpoint, I think the stubby .38 would be the best "all-around" choice.  The .357 is nice, but can be expensive.  A .44 is going to be a bit on the powerful side for a Joe Schmoe Homebody with a Dirty Harry complex.   Lets just hope the .44 owner has thick walls to his/her house. 



			
				Carol Kaur said:
			
		

> I'd rather be extremely precise with a 9mm than reasonably good with a .44.
> 
> Accuracy is final


Yeah, but the 9 doesn't have quite the "small entry, LARGE exit (preferably with pieces missing)" factor of the .44.  Granted, the .44 will be large entry, larger exit, but you get my point.


----------



## Radhnoti (Aug 10, 2006)

I've gone for .357 on all my handguns.  Proven manstopper, as previously mentioned, and my wife (and me from time to time) doesn't mind shooting the .38's to get more practice time.  I have an uncle that retired from the BATF and he felt the .357 was the "straightest shooting" caliber...


----------



## arnisandyz (Aug 11, 2006)

44 mag penatrates too much for a defensive handgun.


----------



## bydand (Aug 11, 2006)

Just to add my 2 cents, and muddy up the water a bit along the way.  I have all the handguns mentioned so far in the thread except for the .500 S&W and if I had to choose one for defense it would be the .357.  Reasonable recoil, plenty of power, accurate, and not overkill (Pardon the pun).  While I like poking holes with the 9MM, I don't feel it gives the immediate stopping as well as the .357.  The .44 is a blast to shoot and VERY, VERY accurate, but way too much gun for defense.  

That said, if you break into my house intending harm, the weapon faced will be a shotgun.  I don't care if you can score perfect every time at the range with anything you pick up, when the excitment is flowing and the nerves are jumping, your accuracy will go right out the window.  Give me something that takes that element out of the mix and also has far less penetration (a miss will not keep going to find a neighbor or a family member) and that is what I want to use.  Forget the 00 Buckshot also, a nice heavy Rabbit load at close range will be just as effective and also lose energy faster that the heavy buckshot loads.

Add to those above factors the mental effect of the sound of a slide action working on a shotgun in a dark house...  I'd be leaving through the nearest window or door!


----------



## Explorer (Aug 11, 2006)

.357 ... I do not consider the .44 a 'handgun' ... it's really more of a carnival ride!

Depending on the situation, I might carry .22 magnum, 32, .380, .40, or .45.

Somewhere in the vicinity of 2 million times a year in the US, people successfully defend themselves with guns ... in only 2% of the cases are the triggers pulled.

Basically, drawing your firearm and coming to low ready is probably all you need.


----------



## pstarr (Aug 12, 2006)

I agree.  Back in 1993 or so, my wife had a bad year - had to draw her weapon (.38 snubby S&W Ladysmith) three times.  Each time, the would-be assailant discovered the meaning of the phrase, "bugger off."...:biggun: :biggun:


----------

