TexasCHLforum.com

Was reading a article on a 2 1/2 barrel revolver that a shooter was testing. He was shooting one in .357mag and one in 44 mag. Here are the ballistics. Both guns are the same just diff calibers.

357-- Federal Nyclad 158grn--1110fps
Winchester Silvertips 145grn--1187 fps
Hornady XTP 125grn--1196 fps

44-- Winchester Silver Tip 210grn--1039fps
PMV Starfire 240grn--1022fps
CCI Blazer--240grn--903fps

Why would the 357mag have better balistics then the 44 mag being that both guns are identical. I was just curious. I enjoy reading about balistics.The 210 grn 44 is not a huge bullet but still unable to hang with the 158 grn 357 that considered a large bullet for that caliber. The article did not give ft lbs of energy.

Heavier = slower ?

See if these numbers make any sense:

357-- Federal Nyclad 158grn--1110fps = 432 fpe

Winchester Silvertips 145grn--1187 fps = 453 fpe

Hornady XTP 125grn--1196 fps = 397 fpe


44-- Winchester Silver Tip 210grn--1039fps = 503 fpe

PMV Starfire 240grn--1022fps = 556 fpe

CCI Blazer--240grn--903fps = 434 fpe


I figured these using a standard formula:

Bullet Weight (Grains) X Velocity (Feet Per Second) ^2 X 0.000002218 (constant) = fpe

(fpe = Foot Pounds of Energy)


surv

(ps... I'm NOT a Ballistics Guru)

I'll use the formula thanks. USA I see your point but the 158 grn is the big heavy bullet for the 357 but it's quicker the a small bullet for the 44 mag in 210 grn?

Keith wrote:I'll use the formula thanks. USA I see your point but the 158 grn is the big heavy bullet for the 357 but it's quicker the a small bullet for the 44 mag in 210 grn?

Heavier=slower.

Heavier is a relative term. Neither bullet is particularly heavy when compared to an automobile, but relative to each other the 158gn bullet is substantially lighter (3/4 the weight) than the 210gn bullet.

Keith wrote:I'll use the formula thanks. USA I see your point but the 158 grn is the big heavy bullet for the 357 but it's quicker the a small bullet for the 44 mag in 210 grn?

There are several things to consider...

One is the velocity x mass equation alluded to above. Another is how quickly that energy bleeds off as the bullet slows down over the course of its arc. A third is the ballistic curve of the arc (faster shoots flatter than slower). Others, which pertain more to rifle shooters than pistol shooters are things like the sectional density and ballistic coefficient of the bullet in use, etc., etc., etc.

Ballistics is an arcane art.

That said, the shooter in your article didn't do a valid test in my opinion. A valid test would have looked like:

357--
Federal Nyclad 158grn--1110fps
Winchester Silvertips 145grn--1187 fps
PMC Starfire X grains --- X fps
CCI Blazer X grains --- X pfs
Hornady XTP 125grn--1196 fps

44--
Federal Nyclad XX grains --- XX fps
Winchester Silver Tip 210grn--1039fps
PMV Starfire 240grn--1022fps
CCI Blazer--240grn--903fps
Hornady XTP XX grains --- XX fps

The way he did it, you're only really comparing the ballistics using the Winchester Silvertip, since that is the only cartridge the two pistols have in common during the test. The other cartridges are irrelevant for comparison purposes unless they are fired in both guns.

Keith,

Somewhere in between 125 grains and 180 grains lays the perfect bullet weight for use against humans, disregarding cross sectional area for the moment. And somewhere between 900 fps and 1200 fps is the perfect velocity for that magic bullet.

A 152.5 grain bullet at 1050 FPS/373 ME is in the middle of all that. Pretty darn close to what you would get from a 2.5 inch barrel with a 158 grain Gold Dot hollow point.

Actually, that's probably a little too much on average sized people. Something about 135-140 grains may be closer to the optimum.

44 Special is nice, but overkill with today's modern hollow point ammo unless you want to shoot ball or EFMJ. Ditto the 45 ACP.

JMHO. This topic never ends, and I never get tired of working it over.

A lot of good points here. I really didn't put much thought into it except for that all different kind of bullets were used . I just never thought a 357 would do that well against it's bigger brother . Again I wasn't getting into all the mathmatics I should have. Thanks again.

Apples - - - .357 vs. Oranges .44 Look at the differences between the various loads in each caliber not the differences between the two calibers.

casingpoint wrote:44 Special is nice, but overkill with today's modern hollow point ammo unless you want to shoot ball or EFMJ. Ditto the 45 ACP.

What's "overkill?" I'm not trying to be a smarty pants, but a lot of us on this forum carry .45 ACP pistols, and there are plenty of folks who've been shot, with modern bullet designs in all kinds of calibers up to and including .44 magnum, and they didn't stay shot. We've had a number threads on this forum which discuss the mindset of staying in the fight and winning, even if we've been shot.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that when you make the decision to drop the hammer on somebody, there is no such thing as "overkill." There is only surviving and going home to your family. The .45 ACP cartridge may or may not be any more effective than a smaller diameter bullet, and that can be legitimately debated using penetration tests, etc., etc.; but I don't think you can call it "overkill," unless I am misunderstanding what you meant by that.

Overkill is reloading to shoot the corpse. All else is fair game.

By overkill I meant more caliber than necessary when used against the average person. The 45 ACP was a takeoff from the Colt 45 Long, which was designed to take down horses when armies used mounted calvary. The 44 Special was intended to duplicate in a revolver the ballistics of the 45 ACP. The 44 MAGNUM is simply off the charts for people. This is not to say they aren't all highly effective rounds when used against humans. But they're not going to kill 'em any deader than a properly placed shot from a 38 Special.

If I was buying a new gun, I might run in the opposite direction and get the 327 MAGNUM in a six shooter. It's a shame the first truly modern revolver ammo design since the age of the dinosaurs seems to have hit a brick wall and could crater out. It's got great power to weight ratio, superb ballistics, expansion and penetration. The guns for it are light and easy to handle and conceal. What more could you ask for in a carry gun for PD? They're gonna sell a million copies if it gets chambered in an eight shot K frame 315 Night Guard. Or an aluminum SP101 Ruger.

When I was a kid I thought I'd find the answer in on of the gun mags. Month after month I would read and compare.
Many moons later this is what I know.
9mm/.38/.357 = o.
.44spl/.45ACP=O!
I miss my Charter Arms Bulldog .44spl.
Actually I only learned from posts above about the .45LC and it's role re: horses, (really?) - not to mention why the .44spl was developed in the 1st place.
Gentlemen, thanks as
allways.

casingpoint wrote:By overkill I meant more caliber than necessary when used against the average person. The 45 ACP was a takeoff from the Colt 45 Long, which was designed to take down horses when armies used mounted calvary. The 44 Special was intended to duplicate in a revolver the ballistics of the 45 ACP. The 44 MAGNUM is simply off the charts for people. This is not to say they aren't all highly effective rounds when used against humans. But they're not going to kill 'em any deader than a properly placed shot from a 38 Special.

If I was buying a new gun, I might run in the opposite direction and get the 327 MAGNUM in a six shooter. It's a shame the first truly modern revolver ammo design since the age of the dinosaurs seems to have hit a brick wall and could crater out. It's got great power to weight ratio, superb ballistics, expansion and penetration. The guns for it are light and easy to handle and conceal. What more could you ask for in a carry gun for PD? They're gonna sell a million copies if it gets chambered in an eight shot K frame 315 Night Guard. Or an aluminum SP101 Ruger.

I would have to take issue with the statement about the .45 Colt (the "Long" was not an official name, it was used by soldiers to define the difference between it and the shorter .45 Schofield round, eventually even Colt picked up the vernacular and used it) being designed to take down horses. The .45 Colt round was a developmental effort by Colt and UMC. Of course the .45 Colt was designed in conjunction with the design of the 1873 Single Action Army, which Colt's hoped would be adopted by the Army, and did lead to it becoming one of the longest, if not the longest, tenured cartridge in continuous production.

OTOH, I am also very interested in the .327 Magnum, I would like to see a large capacity revolver combined with an M1 Carbine, or AR chambering.