Safariland comp 1's and 2's are the same size as HKS loaders and faster and more reliable. 

I have one of those somewhere around here.  It doesn't seem to work as well for me.  The mechanism doesn't feel as positive and reliable.

Give me a 9mm for capacity or a .44 mag for power

Any firearm/caliber is only as good as the person using it.

Personally I use a 6" bbl'd 357 for anything in my little neck of the woods (no bears) 100yds and closer. I have no problem hunting deer out to 100yds & rabbits/groundhog out to 200yds with a 357. I've also downloaded the 357's and hunted squirrels with iron sights to 35yds and scoped to 60yds. I've also hunted grouse with a 357 in the brush and found it easier you use a pistol that a shotgun.

I've used a 357 for bowling pins, 100yd silhouettes, nra bullseye & ppc events. Not only did the 357 allow me to be competitive it allowed to win quite a few events/shoots.
And yes people play games with their revolvers. Used to practice for grouse on the skeet field and would typically hit 6 to 8 targets in a round (25 birds). 6 to 8 doesn't sound like much but grouse aren't going 45mpg and 21+ yds away. Heck hunters were told that skeet was an excellent way to practice (which it is) they'd show up in camo, shellholders on the buttstocks & slings. I'd take them out to the skeet field with a 357 and show them how to call the birds, stations, etc. At the end of the day I beat more than a few hunters with 12ga's with that 357. We used to shoot bowling pins @ 100yds with the 357's, same rules as the 25ft game just 100yds. Or put the skeet clay targets on the 100yd berm (110yds) and using a weaver stance try to run 25 straight. I never got 25 straight but it was nothing to be in the 20's.

Years later my eyes are old & I'm getting lazy. We now shoot 12ga shotgun shells. We set them up just as you would bowling pins. Same rules, the only difference is we use shotgun shells and we shoot them @ 50ft.
I use the same load for nra bullsye as I do for the shotgun shells. In my 357 my plinking load will hold 3/8" @50ft, 3/4" @35yds & 1 5/8" @ 50yds.


I should work on a better 50yd load but anymore if I'm going to shoot that far I either shoot 50m freepistol or 100yd standing silhouettes.

Some people have a use for the 357, others don't. A 357 has treated me pretty good over the decades and still does to this day. And yes I keep a couple of them around the house.

Another note .38 Short Colt and Special wouldn't cycle my .357 Coonans!  What's not to love carrying 8+1 of full magnums wheter ISPC, Bowling Pin comps, Hunting or SD.


CD

Impressive, 200 yards with a revolver, even if its scoped revolver it is impressive.  Grouse and clay pigeons with a revolver is also impressive but I don't think my local skeet field would allow me to try that.

I would have you notice that other than deer hunting you and I have completely different uses for our revolvers.  You play with silhouette, bullseye and PPC and I am playing USPSA and IDPA.  Very different games for very different revolvers.

200yds isn't impressive, finding a load that is accurate out to 200yds is. It all starts with 100yd load development, 1 of my favorite 100yd targets for iron sights. If you can't keep all your shots in the 4" white square, don't bother going any further.


The ppc days are long gone but I still keep a revolver around for spitting lead.


The only silhouettes I shoot anymore is standing silhouettes, smallbore at that. Smallbore rifles use a 1/5 scale target out to 100yds. I like to bring a smallbore pistol, just seems more fun than using the 22lr sporters anymore.


I actually spend more time with these anymore when I want to test my pistol skills. A 10m/25m & 50m pistols. One of the most humbling games a person can play is with the bottom pistol.


In the 100+ years of the 50m freepistol sport if every 3rd shot a shooter had was a 9 for the 60-shot event. That shooter would be a couple points away from a world record.

Anyway, I still find the 357's useful. A couple 357's that I spend a lot of time on the range with. Trigger jobs, weighted bbl's, muzzle breaks an 1 of my pet 357 loads, a 110gr wc doing a measly 1100fps make for an enjoyable day at the range.


The only thing that limits a 357 is the people that own them.

Well, that, plus the chamber pressure and case capacity as well as the diameter of the bullet reducing the area of said lower PSI vs wider rounds with more surface area on the base. 

Well said.
I plan on living out the rest of my day using old outdated calibers:
22lr 1887
9mm 1901
45acp 1904
357 1934
Along with the new kid on the block, 44mag 1950's

For some people getting a bigger hammer is the only answer.

My pistol caliber choices match yours, plus the .38 Special (1898) and .44 Special (1907).  It's not that I hate newer chamberings, I just don't have any at the moment.  One day I'll build a doublestack longslide 9x25 Dillon/10mm convertible.  A .41 Magnum (not exactly new...1964?).  A Freedom Arms .454 (also not really new).  Let's face it, other than for hunting polar bears there really hasn't been anything new under the sun for decades.

I suppose if your willing and able to buy a niche gun for every specialized handgun function, I could see how .357 might be less useful to you. However, the fact that .357 can do everything pretty well is THE reason it dominates the revolver market. What you see as a negative, is viewed by most people as a positive. I will agree that .357 out of a snubby is a TERRIBLE choice IMO. But I LOVE my 4" GP100, and love shooting 158g all day long.

And that was sort of my point of this whole thread.  Yes the 357 Magnum can do a lot of different things fairly well.  But for most revolver/handgun specific applications there are better cartridges.  Especially in my case where I have yet to find a home for the cartridge in my personally list of things I do with my revolvers.

ETA:  I though the following image might be of interest here.  The 38/357 revolver cartridge has a long and sordid history.



Higher resolution version

Click on the link for the original full resolution version of this.  This is NOT my original work, source with a brief description of each cartridge:
https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/1aoiqx/the_38_special_family_tree_my_six_year_pet/

Maybe we're talking in circles here, but you're asserting that the .357mag sucks- in general. I'm asserting that the .357mag sucks - 'for you'. The former argument is easily defeated by the caliber's popularity and long history and documented performance. The latter argument is impossible to defeat because no one can convince you to like something that you don't want to like.
95% of the gun shooting world isn't going to buy 4 different guns, for four different purposes. Hell, 99% of the world's medium framed revolvers are purchased for self defense......which the .357mag is ideal for (and yes, other calibers are well-suited too).
You're an outlier.

Oh- and cool graphic. I saved that one for later.

We are definitely starting lap two here but I am game...  

I am asserting that the 357 Mag SUCKS, in general, because all though a jack-of-all-trades, there are very few specific applications for a revolver where the 357 Magnum is King.  Name an single application for a revolver where your first best choice of cartridge is 357 Magnum?  What activity or game would you select 357 Mag as the best choice?

My GP100 with 158g SJHP is what I'm reaching for if I had to shoot a large mammal. You think it would 'suck' for that application? Your opinion is not shared by most.
According to you, a 10mm or 44mag would be better......therefore the .357 sucks. Of course, a 12g shotgun is WAAAAAY better for that application than the 10mm........therefore wouldn't the 10mm suck too? Really, if we expand on your logic, handguns are pretty much useless since long guns do everything better. No?

.357 is the best blend of size and power for a very large cross section of the gun owning world. Evidentially, its just not a good blend for you. Really this argument is silly. You've even conceded that .357 is good at everything, best at nothing. Most reasonable people wouldn't use the word 'suck' to define an item that's good at everything. Only you.
If that doesn't convince you that .357 doesn't "suck"........then you cannot be helped by a website and should seek the assistance of a mental health professional.

Remember we is in the revolver section all other guns are dead to us so don't go talking about shotguns and such! 

Go over to the deer hunting section and ask for a revolver cartridge recommendation for deer.  For every 357 Magnum recommendation you get you will get two or more recommendations for 41 Mag or 44 Mag.  I am one of the few daft enough to use 10mm Auto in a Revolver for deer hunting.  It's not that 357 Mag can't kill deer but with the selection of cartridges available in this age for a hunting revolver there are better choices and that is not just my opinion.  Do the same in the Elk hunting section and the ratio would be 10:1 against 357 Mag.

Yes it's a good "blend" of power and size but that that does not make it the best at anything.  Thus it SUCKS!   You know, if your not first, your first looser.  

I think it would suck for that application and a .44 mag would be a lot better. 

".357 is the best blend of size and power for a very large cross section of the gun owning world." 

The majority of gun owners don't understand ballistics, train, learn, and are functionally incapable as shooters. 
You just made a case that .357 is great for people who suck. 

So some savvy shooters manage to take a deer with a .357......but you can't? Come on.....you were coming across as a badass up until just then.

I was once in your position.   It was 1972 and I had just picked up a S&W M29 4" Blue.    The M19 4" Blued just stayed at home for a few months.   I was at the range one day and talked to a guy that was shooting a lever action rifle.  He was complaining that he had to special order ammo to shoot it and it was a pain.  I looked at the rifle and offered to trade him the M19.   He liked the idea and took the deal.  The rifle was a Winchester M88 in 358 Winchester.   I wish I had both of them back.  Over the years, I have had many 357 Magnum rifle and pistols.  I would like to have all of them back today.

The 357 Magnum really is a jack of all trades.   IMHO, it is best for someone who does not reload and wants just one handgun.   38 Special practice ammo is fairly cheap and just a bit more than 9mm.  There are a number of factory loads for the smaller deer species available and good self defense ammo.   The manual of arms is also simpler than an auto for other people in the household that may need it for defense.  A good 4 inch 357 Magnum revolver is hard to beat for non dedicated personnel.   Probably best with 38 Special +P ammo for home defense.

If the owner is a handloader, it opens up a different world.   Many bullet types and powders are suitable.  The most fun to me is plinking at long range with 180 to 200 gr cast bullets going about 1100 fps or so.  These will throw up a bigger dust cloud than the lighter bullets.   At one time our range had 55 gal drums out to 500 yards.  Fun to make hits on them at that distance with a 4 inch M19.

For hunting, I like the heavy wide flat nosed bullets.   I managed to get 1300 fps from the Cast Performance 187 gr WFNGC bullet from a 4 inch M686.   1 inch groups at 25 yards from the bench.  

For practice, a max 38 Special load of Unique and a cast 158 gr RNFP is cheap to make and accurate.  Pretty good plinking load to 100 yards with my 4 inch GP100, the only 357 Magnum I have right now.  When reloading bullets were in short supply, the cowboy types were always available.   Another point in favor of the 357 Magnum.

Everyone should have a good 357 double action revolver, just on general principles.

The law enforcement community had .44 magnum at its disposal for years, and chose .357 in many cases. Are you telling me that all those LE agencies were idiots? And you're brilliant? They are a bunch of "functionally incapable" hacks? And you're a boss?
Listen, you can make a case that a .44 mag is better at killing something.......but saying that a .357 'sucks' at that application is just silly. Really.....just stop.
Like most internet interest sites.....photography, golf, home improvement, etc.....the people on those sites have a nerdy, warped view of their hobby. Anything less than $7,000 for a camera (for example) and your a hack photographer and may as well just draw pictures with crayons. If you don't spend 40 hours a week at a shooting range, and memorize the chamber pressure of every .41 magnum load.....you're ill-informed and should sell your guns and take up knitting.
I'll admit to being a casual gun enthusiast. I'll admit that despite my 5 years in the USMC, you've probably forgot more about guns than I'll ever care to know. But you don't need to be John Browning to know that a 158 gr projectile that travels at 1200ft/sec will do a VERY good job of tearing someone TWO new assholes.

Then they filled their .357's with .38 special and it sucked. Then a lot of them switched to 9mm... because they got the guns cheap as hell from GLOCK as marketing buy in. So... not sure why you're hanging your hat on LE. 

"But you don't need to be John Browning to know that a 158 gr projectile that travels at 1200ft/sec will do a VERY good job of tearing someone TWO new assholes." 
Which as a metaphor, doesn't work because assholes do great jobs of sealing up and preventing fluid leakage, one of three main stopping factors for handguns. 

Smaller lighter projectiles, even at the same velocity, with modern bullet construction, have a great ability to function with desirable terminal ballistic effects. So instead of tearing "two new assholes" they create a permanent would cavity that allows any destroyed tissue to allow blood to drop out of severed structures while still penetrating enough to hit CNS components of the body, the preferred stopping factor. 

Plus more of those smaller equally effective rounds can fit in a semi-auto, allowing those effects to be applied more thoroughly. Compared to a .357, which sucks at applying rapid handgun wounding  factors at amounts greater than 6 at a time. 

(If you don't agree with that assessment, bear in mind you're not necessarily disagreeing with me, but the history of modern terminal ballistics research and application) 

"Which as a metaphor, doesn't work because assholes do great jobs of sealing up and preventing fluid leakage, one of three main stopping factors for handguns."


Unless the central nervous system controlling the asshole is no longer functioning. They tend to leak quite a bit in that situation.

You did not happen to be a philosophy major did you? You seem to be doing a really good job of using sophistry to keep the ball rolling on this, as well as taking a fair amount of pleasure doing so. Oh well, far be it for me to stand in the way of any man and his simple pleasures. Have a nice day.

Eh, you call it sophistry, I call it reading the actual technical studies done. As you skipped mentioning, I did address the central nervous system part of your response. 

Do you consider the FBI handgun wounding factors to be sophist in nature? 

Dude, you're bringing semi autos in to revolver discussion.
Again.
And I sure as HELL would not consider a 6 shot 9x19 revolver anywhere near as versatile as a 6 shot .357 revolver.

Nick

I'm bringing capability and effects on target between different platforms into the discussion based on a person basing their argument on ignoring modern ballistics, yes. If the conversation has to be restricted to a very narrowly defined set of things to compare something to to determine if it sucks or not, then it starts to lend credence to it maybe sucking. 

For instance, if to make .357 seem like it doesn't suck compared to modern firearms, training and ammo, one has to move the goalposts by not allowing the conversation to include modern handguns, then move the conversation towards what a round in a less capable platform would be like compared to a different round it shows the actual limitations are implied even though the attempt was to show it as more versatile. 

10mm is more versatile than .357 in a 6 shot revolver, just like .357 is more so than 9mm. 

But, 9mm in a revolver is able to have 6 shots in a smaller form factor than a J-frame with a longer barrel.  So while the ammo loading might lose versatility, a 9mm revolver built around 9mm ammo size, gains specialized performance. 

I only skimmed this a bit out of curiosity but somewhere someone mentioned that factory .357 ammo wasn't much different than +P 9mm.

Taking the Hornady American Gunner stuff as an example in 124gr +P 9mm and 125gr .357...

9mm
Muzzle Velocity: 1200 fps
Muzzle Energy: 396 ft lb

.357
Muzzle Velocity: 1500 fps
Muzzle Energy: 624 ft lb

That's a 50% improvement for the .357 in energy. Yeah, not much different.

It's getting deep around here, 10mm revolver flat out suck!!! Only fools bought & use them. The 10mm revolvers are ssssoooooooo versatile that most mfg's don't even bother to make a revolver chambered for them.

I'm really ought to do more than read the monthly rags, your keyboard runnith over.

You're making an argument about capability based on popularity. 
10mm can utilize a higher chamber pressure and has a wider bullet meaning the area that psi effects is greater than .357.  10mm also can load heavier bullets for this reason as the SD means heavier bullets don't cut into the case capacity as bad as .357 for maintaining OAL. 
Or this can translate into 10mm weight for weight shooting equal size bullets faster, with greater benefit the shorter barrels get due to the higher pressure case not relying on volume for velocity like .357. (10mm can push a 200 grain bullet out of a 2" barrel, as fast as a 158 grain .357 bullet out of a 2" barrel for instance) 
10mm also covers a wider range of commonly loaded bullet weights, as well as uncommon.

.357 is confined by it's lowered pressure and reliance on case volume to either increase velocity, or increase bullet weight. 

Revolvers benefit as greatly from the ability of modern semi automatic cases, as semi-auto pistols do. 

Take the time to look at loads on handloads.com and look at data collected on ballistics by the inch.  I'm not making any of this up, it's the constraint of the physical world we live in. 

BBTI is a reference anyone who wants to discuss ammunition and performance of it should be familiar with. 

Read all the reloading books you can, that's all you're good for is parroting what you read.
The vary thing you keep running your lips about is the vary thing that makes the 10mm a piece of shit.

When you make statements like the 10mm is more versatile than the 357 I say prove it.

10 mm is only available in a few revolvers just as the .357 Mag is only in a few auto pistols.  One point is missing however is the size of the guns.  10mm needs a large frame in a DA revolver where you can hunting and do everything the OP needs in a 4" K frame .357.  And just because a lightweight J frame is chambered in .357 means you have to shoot stout loads in it.  Better to have and not need then to need and not have.


CD

Man!  I take an evening off to go have a beer or two with some friends and you guys go on a tear!  

As far as hunting revolvers go 44 Mag and the 45 cal cartridges really are king especially if we look at critters bigger than a deer.  You would be hard pressed to find a dedicated handgun hunter that thinks the 357 Magnum is the best choice.  It's not that the 357 Magnum can't do it, it's just that it is no longer considered the best choice.  I have (before I became enlighten by the round-gun) hunted deer with a 410 slug gun (killed two nice bucks).  Very few would call 410 slug a good choice let alone the best choice for deer hunting.  Same for the 357 Mag.  It's seen by many as a good choice but it is not the best choice any more.

I will conceded that as far as duty revolvers goes 357 Magnum was King.  There is probably no better revolver cartridge for Duty applications than 357 Magnum.  The problem here is that no one that needs a Duty sidearm selects a revolver anymore.  They have all become heathens and turn to the bottom-feeder.  If you asked a LEO forum for the best duty cartridge you will be lucky to get one recommendation for 357 Magnum.  The overwhelming majority will be 9x19mm with a few holdouts suggesting 40S&W or 45 ACP and a few mall ninja's recommending 357 SIG or 10mm.  There are very few LE agencies or even security agencies that issue revolvers (other than BUGs).  So for Duty applications it was King but is no longer.  357 Magnum's ballistic superiority over 9x19mm has been trumped by bullet improvement and the light weight polymer guns with high-capacity magazines.

Now 10mm Auto; I have a love/hate relationship with the cartridge.  Most of the time I hate 10mm Auto, because all the Mall Ninjas out there that like to claim they have 15+1 rds of 41 Magnum in there cute little Glock 20.  And I think we all realize that is BS.  On the other hand my real world experience with 10mm Auto in my S&W 610 has proven the the cartridge is very capable.  We could argue until plasma weapons replace the slug thrower about which is better 10mm vs 357 Magnum but from my experience they are ballistics are so similar our quarry would be hard pressed to report the difference from beyond the grave.  The are both ~750 ft-lbs cartridges and with good bullets will perform as you would expect a 750 ft-lbs projectile to perform.

As for 10mm in revolvers they do not have to be large N-frames.  The N-frame S&W 610 is the most popular 10mm Auto Revolver due to the number made but both S&W L-frames and Ruger GP100 have been made into 10mm Revolvers.  S&W at one point made the 646 which was an L-frame in 40 S&W.  A simple chamber extension would convert that to 10mm.  Clements Custom Gun offers a GP100 conversion to 10mm Auto.  10mm Auto though growing in popularity is still a fairly obscure cartridge and thus even more obscure in a revolver.

For better or worst I am way past the idea of one revolver to do it all.  I am more than happy to get a gun for a specific applications (see earlier post near the bottom of page 2).  That is why 357 Mag SUCKS IMHO.  Sure 357 Mag could do everything I use a revolver for with one revolver;  I could CCW, hunt, tractor/woods, USPSA, IDPA with a single 357 Magnum revolver but for any one of those application there would be better choices, especially the games.

Ramble on folks!

ETA:  This is mostly for 3221.  I finally found (going into an old backup drive) some pictures of groups fired with my S&W 610 revolvers.  This was quite a number of years ago after working up my first 10mm Auto hunting load.  It was a 180gr Hornady XTP pushed to ~1300fps with a charge of IMR 800X.  The picture quality is pretty bad but remember this was ~10 years ago an I had a crappy camera.


3-inch Shoot-N-C target, 6-Shot Group @ 25 yards over a sand bag using iron sights.


3-inch Shoot-N-C target, 6-shot group @ 50 yards over sandbags using iron sights.

You asked to be convinced that the .357 doesn't suck, then you argue about it. If you're going to argue about it, then you don't really want to be convinced, now do you?

 

 Temporary stretch cavity, light weight expanding bullets, terminal ballistic effects blah, blah, blah.... I find it somewhat interesting that those who spout ballistics figures and studies have rarely, and likely never killed anything and glean their ballistics information from others. In the countless dozens of heads of game I've killed, gutted and examined over the last 40+ years, both with very powerful rifles and handguns, I've yet to see a single temporary cavity (whatever the hell that is), and I can assure you that what you refer to as "assholes" do NOT "seal up and prevent fluid leakage". That may just be the most retarded statement I've ever read in my life and certainly shows a complete lack of real experience in what bullets really do. Really want to know what kind of handgun bullets are most effective? Ask an experienced handgun hunter. I assure you we don't use cute little lightweight hollowpoints.

  While we're deviating from the subject, my all time favorite argument for the (yawn) 9mm is perfectly summed up in the last two sentences of the above quote. "It's the best man stopper out there AND you can fit more of 'em in a magazine!!"  Which begs the question: If it's such an effective round, then why would one need to carry so many in a magazine?

 But back to the .357, it is in my mind very similar to the .308 Winchester; it may not be perfect for any one job, but will do just about anything anyone could ask of a revolver cartridge, IOW it's very versatile. I have four .357's; three revolvers and one rifle. Although I don't shoot them much, if I were limited to one revolver and were not a handloader, as most handgun shooters are not, the .357 would be the most logical choice because of the obscene varieties of ammunition choices .

So to the OP, if you don't like the .357, get rid of yours. Why in God's name would you own firearms chambered for cartridges for which you have no use?? That's about as silly as "assholes" sealing themselves up.

I asked to be convinced it doesn't suck? That is incorrect. 

" I find it somewhat interesting that those who spout ballistics figures and studies have rarely, and likely never killed anything and glean their ballistics information from others."
Good thing I don't conform to that then. 

"In the countless dozens of heads of game I've killed, gutted and examined over the last 40+ years, both with very powerful rifles and handguns, I've yet to see a single temporary cavity (whatever the hell that is),"
Well, maybe it's because it's temporary. Despite being uneducated about modern terminal ballistics, I'm sure you could have derived that? 

"and I can assure you that what you refer to as "assholes" do NOT "seal up and prevent fluid leakage"
It was a joke based on biology and the ability of through and through shots to not bleed a lot sometimes. 

But yea, as a hunter, shooter, combat vet and having an interst in terminal ballistics, I'll stick with what my direct observations that jive with what the terminal ballistics researchers have found. 

Already gave you the resources buddy, horse, water, drinking and all that jazz. 

eta- Are you also suggesting that people who reload are not an authority on ammunition?  Because if that's the case then a lot of peoples opinions can be discounted. 

Yet K frames restrict ammo to heavier bullets to reduce risk of forcing cone fracture, which is why the larger 586/686 revolver was made. 

As far as short barrel ballistics, well... .357 sucks in short barrels. 
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/38special.html
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html

In the 2" barrel test, the .357's reliance on case volume and barrel length to make velocity is shown. 9mm added to show how in 2" barrels it preforms better due to it's ability to make pressure quick, fast and in a hurry. 

Actually I'm suggesting you ain't got a clue!!!
Actually I'm suggesting you ain't an authority on reloading!!!
Actually I'm suggesting you ain't an authority on ammunition!!!

All's you've done so far is parrot what your read. Why don't you tell us about something you've actually did with the 10mm.

What's your favorite birdshot load?
What's your favorite bullseye load?
What load do you use for small game like squarrel?
What load do you use for rabbit/groundhog @ 200yds?
What's the lightest bullet you use?
What the lightest/lowest pressure load you can use?

Any idiot can hit something with a hammer, that's why they made the 10mm.

You call yourself a reloader but yet you don't have a clue when it comes to small capacity cases like the 10mm that headspace on the mouth of the case. Only a fool would say the 10mm is more versatile than the 357mag.

357 vs 10mm versatility
357 ='s 70gr to 200gr bullets  10mm ='s 125gr to 200gr bullets

357 vs 10mm versatility
357 ='s 7,000psi to 35,00psi   10mm 21,000psi to 37,500psi

Everyone but you can see the 357 has a larger/better bullet selection.
Everyone but you can see the 357 has wider range of safe/accurate operating pressures.

I got an idea seeing how you think you got a clue. Why don't you load up a 110gr bullet with a 15,000psi load (heck and bullet you want for that 15,000psi load). While you're scratching your head wonder why you can't hit dirt clods @ 10 paces with that 10mm, I'll be chewing up 50yd nra targets with the 357.

Keep trolling, that's all you know.

About the only thing I can do when I look at those targets is laugh!!! Thank god you were using a rest.

After looking at that I can see why you think a bunch of calibers suck.

You're trying to hurt someone's feeling again...    I think this was directed at Madcap72 but I am going to have a go at it too, looks like fun!  


I am partial to 1-1/8oz #7.5 magnum shot, Duster Wad, in Winchester AA compression formed hulls push by a healthy dose of Alliant Red Dot to about 1200fps
I also like the old paper shells.  I have some older Federal Gold Medal and picked up a case or two of new Fiocchi paper that I load a similar load in (6-pt crimp) for my over and under.  Love the smell of the paper and I do think that shoot a touch softer.


2.5 gr of Bullseye under a 200gr Hemispherical round nose bullet in a 38 S&W case pushing it out of my Webley Mark IV at a blistering 600fps!  


1/2oz of #8 shot in 2.5 inch 410 Wincheter HS hulls pushed by a max load of H110/W296 to ~1350fps.  Does a number on squirrel, rabbits and clay pidgeons


Above 410 load for rabbits.  Ground hogs I have used everything from bow and arrow, to muzzle loaders, and 22LR to 7mm Rem Mag.  My personal favorite is 22WMR in my Marlin 25MN.


Does 20gr CB caps count?   I tend to lean toward heavy for caliber reloading.  I have used 125 in 38 Specials and 135 in 40S&W but I prefer 158 in 38/357 and 180 in 40S&W/10mm for range ammo.


That 38/200 load for my Webley is about 12,500 psi according to Quickloads.  I have loaded 45 ACP with Trailboss and 200gr FPRS lead bullets that I am pretty sure are under 10,000psi.  The recoil spring I used was just barely able to hold the gun in battery against the reduced striker spring (XD-45ACP).


As a hobbyist blacksmith I can tell you that is not as true as you would think.  


357 Magnum case capacity: 25.6gr H2O
10mm Auto case capacity: 24.0gr H2O
so 10mm Auto has 6.25% less capacity...

What does head-spacing off the rim vs case mouth have to do with anything here?  Bullseye shooters have been using 45ACP head spaced off the case mouth for over 100 years.


If your going to give 357 Mag 200gr bullets (very few if any commercial loaders load that heavy) you got to give 10mm  at least 220gr bullets.  More than one of the small commercial loaders offers 220gr hard-cast in 10mm.  I have seen hand loaders take 10mm even heavier.



Where do these bottom limits come from?  I have no doubt I could take 10mm down to 10,000 - 12,000 psi no problem especially in a revolver, with no slide to cycle.


Not many people care about the bottom side of the performance curve, at least not the Mall Ninja's drawn to 10mm Auto.  On the top end you have to give the performance edge to 10mm, just barely.  Higher pressure, heavy bullet weights, and more bore area to utilize it.  Personally I don't see either of them being that much better or worst than the other in the ballistics department.  Again, both cartridges can deliver about ~750ft-lbs with comparable bullets.  Accuracy is going to come down to the quality of the ammunition and gun.  Handloads in a S&W 610 are going to out shoot PPU 357 Mag ammo in a Taurus any day and twice on Sunday.  Handloads in a custom built S&W PPC revolver will smoke a G20 with commercial ammo any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

You really are a bitter old man aren't you?  The only 50 yard target you posted to this thread so far has about the same group size as my 50 yards target.  My ~3.5 inch group at 50 yards with factory S&W sights is just fine with me.

Personally, if I were to hunt deer with a handgun, out of all my handguns I have the only one that is legal in my state is my .357.  (6" Model 19)  Our state requires 5.5" plus, barrel from chamber to muzzle.  So most autoloaders are out of the question.  But you could do long slide Glocks and such.  Or a threaded barrel out of a 1911.  That type of a thing.  

So...  I've watched a few videos and I'm trying to understand where you're coming from Madcap.  I see that some .357 loads perform very similar to 9mm loads.  But I'm also in the camp of the proof is in the pudding.  I think the .357 probably lets you stretch your distance out in comparison to a 9mm.  And since you claim you have hunted have you taken a deer with a .357 and found it wanting?  I personally have never killed a deer with a handgun but I did do a little bit of experimenting with ballistics with deer hunting.  I never did get a chance to shoot a deer with my AR, but I had taken it a few times.  

I did use the 125 grain Hollow Point .30-30 load that was labeled as a varmint bullet.  It opened up quickly and that year I used it, it played to my benefit.  Because I gut shot a running deer and it bled out so quickly from a pretty large exit wound that it only went about 200 yards before laying down and we got that deer.  Had I been using a more traditional load, I think it would have kept going and going but I'll never know.  

My uncle and Cousin both used varmint rounds for deer hunting because they got sick of losing deer that ran for a while when hunting on public land.   Even a kill shot might allow a deer to run several hundreds yards and then some dude will claim he shot it because it ended up closer to him.  I personally witnessed that.   So my uncle had a friend that handloaded the 125 grain Varmint Tip bullet for his 06 and it typically put a deer down quickly. Because it expanded so violently and had enough "ass" as you say to penetrate enough for a kill shot.  I gutted some of his kills and if it was a torso shot, it would go in small, blow everything up on the inside.  Well not everything but a lot, and you'd see several fragments embedded into the opposite side of torso on the inside.  It made a huge stinking mess and it was annoying to gut his deer.   But it killed them quickly.  

My cousin did something similar with his .243 and just just shot the 80 grain varmint bullets instead of the normal 90-100 grain .243 loads.  They never had much of a blood trail, but the deer went down much quicker typically.  And both those guys have shot and keep shooting more deer of anyone I've ever met.

Anyways.......  all that experience doesn't add a whole lot to this particular discussion other than that it does seem like sometimes theory is espoused a lot and sometimes real life experience is overlooked.  I think you have it right when you say that you should use a combination of the two.  But if you're saying .357 sucks for killing stuff, I think you might be missing out on the fact that people have used it successfully on game for a long time and my guess is more deer have been taken with .357 than 9mm.  Now if 9mm was in a package that was typically more legal to hunt with, like in my state, maybe those numbers would change and maybe 9mm would work.  But I still say you're going to get more range from .357 than 9mm, due to the velocity difference.  Which would be a good thing when hunting deer.  

I really don't get how someone could say a .357 sucks.  It's as capable as any other service sized round out there.   And yeah, I think it's a bit more versatile.  Because even if you don't like .38 special, it also will still kill stuff.  You can debate that all you want.  Because as I still think just because you've found instances where .38's failed, you're overlooking the instances where 9mm have failed.  Are you really claiming there are no instances where 9mm didn't stop a threat?  Or heck, most any other service handgun caliber?  Only .38's were found to fail?  I have a hard time believing that one.

Funny thing is, in a Ruger Redhawk 357 with full blown handloads it will smoke almost anything your precious 10mm will do. 158gr @1800+ fps, 180gr at 1600+ fps. 357 Magnum has a lot of room to grow if your firearm is capable. The overbuilt Redhawk will take near 353 Casull loads.

First up don't take. "the 357 Mag suck" personally.  It's just a phrase I used when I first started this thread to generate some discussion, and for the most part it has been a good discussion.

We can keep arguing 10mm vs 357 magnum. At this point I don't think we will change anyone's mind but I enjoy discussing all the nuances of cartridges.  But my objection to 357 Magnum are less base on it's ballistic performance and more base on other aspects of its employment.

First up 357 Magnum sucks because it's noisy for a hunting cartridge.  Yes I am a pansy with delicate hearing but I got looking at Quickload and I may be on to why I perceive 10mm as "quieter" than 357 Mag.  With my two hunting loads mentioned earlier, 357 Mag, 158gr XTP @1400fps vs 10mm, 200gr XTP @1250fps.  When I plug those two loads into Quickload the thing that jumps out is muzzle exit pressure.  From a 6.5 inch barrel the 357 Mag load uncorks while still at ~7800 psi where as the 10mm Auto load uncorks at only ~3700 psi.  That is half the muzzle exit pressure and that, no doubt, has a big impact on each cartridges concussive effects and why the 10mm Auto does not ring my ears the way the 357 Magnum does.

357 magnum sucks for practical pistol competition (USPSA, IDPA and similar run'n-gun shooting sports).  The long skinny cartridges are a pain in the arse to eject and load quickly and reliably, especially on moonclip guns.  The few guys still using 38/357 revolvers in competition are using 38 Special or shorter cases.  Most USPSA guys have converted to rimless-cartridge revolvers.  59% of the 2016 USPSA Revolver National competitors used a rimless-cartridge revolvers (9mm, 38 Super, 45ACP & 40S&W) , the balance was 38 Short Colt or 38 special, no one shot a 357 Magnum.  There are still a few 357 Mag hold outs in IDPA but they are few and far between.  It's nearly all 38 Special (38 Long/Short Colt is not legal), 45 ACP and a few 40S&W (9mm & 38 Super are not a legal revolver cartridge in IDPA)

357 Magnum in a pocket carry revolver sucks.  It's painful to shoot, slow with follow ups, statistical not that much more effective in social engagements when used in snubbies, and costs close to twice as much as the comparable 38 Special pocket revolver.  Not to mentions 38 Special performs slightly better when fired from a 38 Special chamber than from a 357 Magnum chamber as you loose velocity due to blow by in the long chamber.

This guy here thinks a little differently about .357 snubs.   Now whether the extra velocity adds up to performance, I'm no expert and it might not.  But I do know that part of the issue of HP bullets opening up is velocity.  From time to time I watch vids on .38 special gel tests and it's evident some of the bullets don't open up like they might if there was more velocity.  I carry 158 grain LRN in my 442 and then use 125 XTP's as my reloads.  But I'm not sure I'm better off with any of them over a 130 grain FMJ or a wadcutter.   I just want it to penetrate.   The XTP's seem to penetrate well because they DON'T open up.  So there's always that too.  There is a balance of opening up, penetration, and how velocity affects it from different length barrels.   And performance changes with the different scenarios.  I've always tried to lean towards penetration.   Even at times I'd load FMJ 9mm in my M9 when it as in an HD role and don't care if people think that's dumb.  

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38vs357snub.htm

What will it do with 200-220 grain bullets? 

Well, it's a tech thread, I've been posting up verifiable information, you've been yelling at clouds trying to dick measure vs discuss actual things. 
If you think showing data that doesn't agree with your opinion is trolling either ignore what I have to say, or I can start a pit thread so we can hash it out there instead of your shitting in a tech thread because I say things you don't like. 
 

Haven't gone to a 200gr but doing some reading I see some loading that up between 1300-1400fps.....only in stout guns though.

Oh.  So not much faster than some factory 10 loads using saami spec pressure and 5" or shorter barrels. (I.E. Underwood).

Your argument about narrowing the goal posts to a single specific firearm, to load ammo over pressures that might destroy other handguns, in order to make a point that .357 can be forced to do better than 10mm does at it's normal pressure kind of showcases the limitations of .357.  To perform better in one metric, it has to be limited. 

I have the S&W ammo listing that came with my LNIB M13-2. All the velocities are vintage 70's stuff. It's unsurprising the loads have been slowed down dramatically over the decades. 

Bet you 357 Magnum lovers still can't hit a sub 2 second reload with 357 Mag, or hit sub 0.2 second splits with those over SAAMI super hot loads.

Yup, not much faster....just 125-200fps faster than 200gr Buffalo Bore loads.

Personally I'm a 44 caliber person, Special/Magnum/SuperMag. They accomplish all the heavy duty pistol needs I have. Butting into this topic wasn't my first choice but with all the 10mm numbers being thrown around to establish it's dominance over the 357 Magnum I kind of felt obligated to chime in. Pushing the 357 cartridge to its true limits requires one to purchase a quality handgun, something your SW isn't. Ballistically the longer/skinnier 357 when pushed will out perform the 10mm the OP is so fond of.

Just enjoy what you enjoy, have fun shooting them and be happy there's the perfect gun out there for us all.

I have found in another thread someone shared 10mm Auto loaded well above SAAMI generating over 1000ft-lbs of muzzle energy.  The does not mean much though.  If both cartridge are loaded to SAAMI max pressure they have similar ballistic performance.  ~750ft-lbs from both guns.  If your going to hot rod the 357 Mag then compare it to hot rod 10mm Auto loads.

And again my fondness of 10mm Auto and my dislike of 357 Magnum have more to do with other functional aspect of each cartridge than raw muzzle energy.  My hunting load I killed two does with this year was only 700 ft-lbs at the muzzle with a 200gr XTP from my 610.

If I feel the need for more energy than that I will step up to 44 Mag rather than push 10mm Auto or 357 Mag past SAAMI.

I thought that I was, the 357 loads I mentioned are also over 1000 foot pounds.  Wasn't trying to be misleading or comparing apples to oranges.