.357 Magnum for deer

cote_b

cote_b

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
232   0   0
Location
Ontario
Perhaps this topic has been beaten to death and there may never be a consensus on the matter, but what are you personal opinions on using a .357 magnum on deer? I bought a .357 magnum lever action with a nice long barrel, 24". Just wanted it for a plinker and I reload .357 aswell, so that helps. I have been mulling over the idea of perhaps taking out this deer season in the bush for close range shots, 75 yards or under. I was ideally looking for a .44 mag lever, but this was a good deal and I didn't know at the time I was going to start loading .44 mag, which I now do. I really like the rifle too, so I don't know if I want to go selling it and trying to get a .44 now.

So out of a 24" barrel, using hot handloads, should I be fine taking deer under 75 yards with a good shot? I have read conflicting opinions on the matter on other sites. I personally think it would be fine, but then again, I've yet to take a deer in my life so what do I know.

Thanks
 
minimal at best- take a look at what a 30/30 does in factory loads and see if yours compares- and be absolutely sure of your shots- ie boiler room- I've got a 94 trapper(44 mag) that has no such questions out to 100 yards- 150 if I push it- it's roughly the same argument as 223 for deer- I use the 30/30 as a 'yardstick" as it has probably taken more deer of all sizes than anything else
 
Last edited:
With good 158 grain loads or even heavier, you won't have problems if you exercise good shot placement and keep the shots close. An old hunting buddy of mine has hammered a couple dozen deer with a Marlin .357 mag lever and has never lost one.
 
I can't find the thread, but someone here posted a couple of years ago (with great pics) about shooting a doe with .357 at pretty decent range. The heart had a hole about 2 1/2" across, straight through, if I recall. After reading that post, I'd personally go after deer with handloads out to 100 yards for sure.
 
What type of bullet would be best? I also heard conflicting opinions on that, from hard cast flat points, hollow points and stuff like Hornady FTX. I think the .357 can get some pretty good velocity out of a 24" barrel, especially with a full charge of H110 or 4227.
 
Yeah, that's what I thought. Hot loads, quality bullets, good shot placement and reasonable range should lead to a successful kill.
 
this one kills me ,I constantly hear /read about guys using .357 mag with 6" barrel pistols for hunting in the states and getting great results on deer ,B.Bear,500lb hogs out to 100m. but as soon as we add a rifle barrel with considerably MORE energy its borderline effective on anything but bambi.it will do its part as long as you do yours.
 
migrant hunter said:
If you can kill a deer with a bow, you can kill a deer with a .357 carbine.
Click to expand...

Was it you that made a similar comment comparing a .223 to a bow regarding lethality??? You really should cease and desist, because you are revealing your ignorance regarding the physics and mechanics behind the terminal performance of archery gear... average archery gear (broadhead equipped arrow exceeding 450 grains propelled by a standard hunting bow of 60ish pounds), has considerably more ability to render larger game DEAD than a .357 Magnum rifle of any load or barrel length.
 
Hoyt, maybe his point is that if you can get within bow range of a deer you can kill it with a .357 carbine.
 
There are some great bullets on the market now for the 357. I'd have no issues shooting deer inside a 100 yards if I could keep a decent group of 3". I'm not a fan of semi Buckhorn sights.
 
broadhead67 said:
this one kills me ,I constantly hear /read about guys using .357 mag with 6" barrel pistols for hunting in the states and getting great results on deer ,B.Bear,500lb hogs out to 100m. but as soon as we add a rifle barrel with considerably MORE energy its borderline effective on anything but bambi.it will do its part as long as you do yours.
Click to expand...

Maybe that is because the minute you add a rifle barrel there are infinitely better options out there?.... Handgun hunting requires sticking to limits similar to that of bow hunting.... If you are going to hunt with a rifle you may as well hunt with one that doesn't impose these limits on you.....

As far as the OP's question, yes, it will be effective if you do your part with good bullets etc. within 100 yards.... but why not take something better if you have it?
 
Can-down said:
Hoyt, maybe his point is that if you can get within bow range of a deer you can kill it with a .357 carbine.
Click to expand...

Migrant Hunter... if your point was proximity rather than lethality, then I apologize profusely. However, the clarification was worthwhile for other readers, even if the delivery was lacking.
 
Well both really. I know a bow kills in a different way(sort of, as blood loss/lung function is what kills). I meant that the bow has limitations compared to a rifle, as does a pistol cartridge. If you hunted with a .357 like you were hunting with a bow, you would do fine. And yes, I have killed big game with a bow.(and a shotgun,handgun,and rifles, inc round ball in a flintlock).
 
hoytcanon said:
Migrant Hunter... if your point was proximity rather than lethality, then I apologize profusely. However, the clarification was worthwhile for other readers, even if the delivery was lacking.
Click to expand...

Problem is that the prevailing attitude is bow is weaker than gun.... if I was limited to bow and handgun range I would choose the bow each and every time... as you said... very different killing mechanisms...
 
Keep in mind that probably the most controversial topic with calibres and deer is generally about .223.

According to ballistics101.com, a 223 gives a muzzle energy of 1200-1600 lb/ft, depending on ammo.

According to ballistics101.com, a 357 Mag gives a muzzle energy of 500-750 lb/ft, depending on ammo (although granted this is listed under the handgun category, so you may be able to achieve slightly higher numbers firing from a rifle).

Further, with the nature of the cartridge, the 223 due to less drag is going to hold that energy much longer than the 357, which is to state that it will be 200-300m before the 223 energy is cut in half, where as the 357's may be half by 100m.

Therefore, opinions and emotions aside, and looking at the data, if 223 is an "on the fence" round for deer, the fact that 357 has half or less the energy, the numbers show that 357 is not effective for a deer.

You may get people saying they have done it and it is possible, but that does not mean it should be done. You could technically kill someone with a needle as well, if your "placement" is exactly perfect, but I'm sure if you asked them while you were torturing them that they'd prefer a 30-06 to get it over with.
 
I hear what you're saying, but does'nt that mean we should all hunt with a .30-06?
Last year I went out on opening day of rifle with my .50 flintlock. I saw half a dozen deer that I could easily have shot with my .243(150-200 yards). I had chosen to use my flinter just for fun, and the added challenge. 100 yds is a long way for the flintlock, and I accept that, just like 40 yds is a long way with a bow(for me anyway).
There are guys in the US who shoot deer every year with handguns(6" revolvers included), so there's no doubt that a .357 will kill a deer. It's a question of choice, practise and responsible shot placement. I would no more condemn a guy for using a .357 lever gun than I would for hunting with a black rifle, or even ....ugh..a crossbow.
 
I wince every time I hear someone place the morality of their kill on shot placement, because of two things:

1. Real life targets move. I don't care how many times someone can hit paper, a deer (or any animal/person) can and will move, so from the time you think you're making the shot to the time it hits, the target can move several inches/feet.

2. Nobody on this website is Mark Wahlberg from Shooter. People get nervous and their pulse is all over the place, which is amplified greatly from the standing position. People misjudge distance, and people misjudge wind, and all of these factors push the round away from where you want it to hit.

End result is that even if the deer is still (which it may not be), the average person is not going to place a shot in the sweet spot, especially from 100+.

Therefore, accepting that the above two points are a reality, the most ethically sound thing to do is go for overkill, not ask questions as to how small you can go and still potentially kill something. What happens if the deer jolts and you blow a leg off? Are you going to have fun knowing the deer lived 30 minutes running around on three legs? What happens if your aim isn't perfect and you puncture a hole through the deer's face? Even if it drops on the spot, are you going to have a good time walking up to a deer gurgling on its own blood and struggling to breath?

Much better to ensure that you're blowing a hole large enough into the deer that it dies quickly even if you hit a non-lethal spot, even if it costs you a few pepperettes of meat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom