Henry Rifle Forums

over time we've had several members express concern about using a 357 to hunt big game .... our family knows from first hand experience that both a 357 and 44 mags are highly capable hunting calibers .... below is a link to a penetration test .... frankly, the 357 performed a bit better than I would have predicted

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QolnISQDaHw

As several of the first comments on this link suggested, it would have been a better comparison if the two revolvers had the same barrel lengths. Nonetheless...

I question the reliability of only a one shot test, but I'd say that it's pretty much a draw with those two individual guns. My experience, though, is that the 44 mag takes a really big hit on any barrel length under 4". Needs 4" or more to develop typical 44 mag velocities.

I was impressed that it was so close

Maybe it's a totally separate thread that should be posted in "Hunting," but I'd just like to hear from forum members about their experience with a 357 Henry in different hunting scenarios. What game was taken, at what distance, with what ammo? The YouTube offerings are good to a point, but they tend to stop short of the apples-to-apples that's needed.

It's bad enough hanging 1 sheet of drywall, let alone 20...

I wouldn't like to be on the receiving end of either caliber. I'm pretty sure my body wouldn't know the difference between a .357 or a .44.

a second, much more detailed video by Paul Harrell (link below) .... I think its well done

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjxryJ9FKVA

Thanks. Good video. However, I didn't think he should have picked the 180 grain load for the 357. That is nowhere near the traditional load for the 357. The traditional load for the 357 is the 158 grain load. The cartridge was developed around that load. The 180 357 is rally a specialty load for the specific purpose of deep penetration.

agree ... I believe the only reason he used 180's in both for the first test was it was the only bullet weight he could find ammo for both .... after that he did move to 357 Mag 158's and 44 mag 240's

By the way, I do use the hardcast 180 357s as my carry load as defense against a possible black bear attack and have complete confidence in them. Griz would be a different story. Then it would be 44 mag on up.

North Country Gal wrote:By the way, I do use the hardcast 180 357s as my carry load as defense against a possible black bear attack and have complete confidence in them. Griz would be a different story. Then it would be 44 mag on up.

"you are a better man than I am Gunga Din" .. : D .. I have supreme confidence in our Redhawk 44 Mag but when it comes to Griz, I'd want a 45-70 ..

North Country Gal wrote:I question the reliability of only a one shot test, but I'd say that it's pretty much a draw with those two individual guns. My experience, though, is that the 44 mag takes a really big hit on any barrel length under 4". Needs 4" or more to develop typical 44 mag velocities.

Yes, it seems like that the same barrel length would have been a better comparison.