.357 mag or .44 mag That is the question...

[davidwilso78]

Fellow gun patrons,

I have gone through the research and I have my own opinion on this topic but thought I would open it up for discussion. .357 vs .44 ... Carry weapon, home protection, muzzle flash wow factor, big animal protection while in the wilderness, lever action and SAA western shooting... Bring what you have for opinions and experience!

 

[diver dan]

Lever actions can be problematic in thick underbrush in bear territory , A lot of guides carry 44mag pistols because of that.And its better to stay with the 44mag because you can get lighter loads for a 44mag and be at 357 power ,and thats my opinion . I shoot a 44mag with 240 grain hydro-shoks , its a potent pill for sure,it makes my 14inch barrel jump and roar.

 

[92FSTech]

I have both and like both.

In handguns I like the extra power of the .44, and it doesn't hurt that my Model 69 has the best trigger and smoothest action of any wheelgun I own. I also like the extra punch and penetration for bigger critters.

The .357 is available in smaller packages and is a better choice for defense against two-legged problems. My Model 640 is much easier to conceal and carry around town than the 69.

Both cartridges are very versatile and can be loaded from light .38/.44 Special to heavy magnum. This provides pleasant practice options for close-range handgun shooting, but is not quite so useful at distance as the trajectories can differ drastically from your carry/hunting load and requires a drastically different zero across the load range.

In rifles, both gain a lot of velocity from a longer barrel. The .357 shoots flatter, and my particular example (Marlin 1894C) is more accurate and less ammo-picky than my 44 (Marlin 1894P).

I'm not sure I could happily pick just one. Each has a role that it excels in, and while both can be pressed into service for either role in a pinch (which I've definitely done from time to time), it's much nicer to have the option of using the appropriate tool for the job.

 

[CB1911]

If I lived out West I might think differently, but for me the 357 magnum would seem to check most of the boxes except perhaps big animal protection. A Buffalo Bore hardcast outdoorsman load might check that box though. A .357 revolver for me is extremely versatile and a handloaders dream. I have owned a few 44 mag revolvers and I just didn't shoot them much. The 38/357's are far more useful to me and get shot often.

 

[snapping turtle]

Of course not true on INGO. ( We shoot them all and no one ever complains of kick from magnum handguns.)

Of the three smith 357 magnum handguns I have purchased used; 2 were high round counts and one was basically a mint unshot model. Of the four smith 44 magnums I have purchased 3 came with 6 rounds missing from the box of shells one had been hunted with often.

So in my humble option most people will shoot a 357 more than a 44 mag. I will admit that the 3 44 magnum were purchased from people who were clint Eastwood fans. Shot a cylinder and put away.

 

[Leadeye]

44 mag will be more costly to shoot. Both are good choices for lever gun hunting in this area.

Hand loading will help cover many of the squares and save you a lot of shooting money.

 

[duanewade]

I've got a Dan Wesson in both .357 (several other .357s too) and .44 mag and a Rossi R92 in .44 magnum and enjoy shooting them all. I'd have no qualms about carrying the .44 pistol and rifle as all around purpose guns for 2 legged and 4 legged critters. One load the .44 with about any flavor from mild to wild and cover all the bases.

 

[Max Volume]

I have both in handgun and lever guns. If it were just for the midwest area I would most likely say .357. There is no animal living here the .357 won't take care of.
The 44 is larger and a bit more for a carry gun even if loaded with sweet shooting mild 44 specials. As previously
mentioned cost is another factor.
If you are going where bears roam I'd take into consideration the odds of actually needing to use a gun on one
if you only want/can have one of them. If you were living in an area like that and frequently spent more of
your time in the woods then I would say 44.

 

[ECS686]

I’ve had a couple 44 mags a revolver and a rifle but not king. I have had several 357 Mags since 1991 as my first duty gun so I am partial to that round. As far as out west I lived in Montana a couple years and carried a S&W 686 all over the mountains as a backup to my Centerfire rifle with no concerns.

Both 44 and 357 are great and there are a lot of hard cast options for the 357 if you are more concerned with dangerous game. That said if I was out west I wouldn’t use either one I. A rifle out there in the high country anyway.

No here I’ve dropped several deer with my Marlin 357 and they didn’t go more than a couple steps.

 

[1nderbeard]

I like .357 because that's what I have. I could also make due with .44. They both fit different niches.

 

[cavallo]

I have a 357 and really like it. It is enjoyable to shoot. I have shot a 44 mag and I would call that just at the upper end of what I would call comfortable to shoot. With 357, for a given cylinder diameter you may be able to get an extra round. (My 357 holds 7 rounds whereas the same size cylinder in 44 would only hold 6.) Lastly, 357 is much less expensive than 44.

All that being said, I would like to get a 44 one day. For big game protection (bears, mountain lions, etc), 44 mag all day long.

 

[Drewfus]

Duh, .41 Magnum. Glad I could help.

 

[davidwilso78]

Lever actions can be problematic in thick underbrush in bear territory , A lot of guides carry 44mag pistols because of that.And its better to stay with the 44mag because you can get lighter loads for a 44mag and be at 357 power ,and thats my opinion . I shoot a 44mag with 240 grain hydro-shoks , its a potent pill for sure,it makes my 14inch barrel jump and roar.

The chest holstered .44mag is what I have read about for this scenario. However I like the 7 rounds and the faster sight picture of my 686 plus 5 inch barrel and the fact my Rossi 92 can pack a punch. Loading up a wicked .357 only adds to the equation. My experience with .44 mag is ouch and I am not a small man by any means

 

[davidwilso78]

Duh, .41 Magnum. Glad I could help.

It is a great in between option for sure

 

[JTKelly]

Fellow gun patrons,

I have gone through the research and I have my own opinion on this topic but thought I would open it up for discussion. .357 vs .44 ... Carry weapon, home protection, muzzle flash wow factor, big animal protection while in the wilderness, lever action and SAA western shooting... Bring what you have for opinions and experience!

Bigger is better. 44 mag all the way.

 

[pmbiker]

If I lived where claws and teeth were a concern, .44 mag or .45 Colt +p(I know, not a real designation)
Around here 357 does it for me.

 

[jrbarnes]

Get the best of both worlds. The 41 mag!

 

[Skullglide]

I have carried a 3” Adj sight GP100 .357 in black bear and Grizzly areas, Tennessee, Colorado, Montana with 180-200 grain Hardcast. Never felt under gunned. This boils down to personal preference.

 

[tomcat13]

Have Both in Handgun & Enjoy Shooting Both, regularly.
I reload most everything I shoot (probably couldn't afford to shoot, otherwise), so I can load Either- Hot or reasonable.
As I've aged, I find that Less Recoil is Better on my Old Bones!
I use Neither 357 nor 44 Mag for EDC or Hunting(fortunate to have Other weapons for those purposes).
While I don't own a Lever gun, my "Want List" includes a Henry 1860 in 45 Colt.

 

[Refrigerator27]

.357 for the hood, .44 for the woods