Using a 180 cast flat nose (or heavier), I'd have no problems or fears using a 357 lever gun for deer, hogs, bears, elk, moose. Until you've seen it in action, you don't know what the hell you are talking about, and you should likely abstain from offering an ignorant opinion. Of course, feel free to look like an idiot.
The OP was seeking comment and opinion and the comments didn't sound ignorant to me. The gist of the comments is that , yes the .357 rifle will work but it has range and power issues vs. a .30-06 class big game rifle. Most 150-165 grain .30-06 loads produce velocity at over 300 yards that the .357 magnum delivers at the muzzle. It seems that most hunters owning a more capable rifle would use it for big game. Some folks like to use as least effective a weapon as is legal, such as archery. More power to them, but when you seek opinion and get one that is different from yours it doesn't automatically mean the giver is ignorant or an idiot. Most big game hunters that might encounter a bear would use a rifle that produces considerably more energy than a .357 magnum. I wouldn't quit hunting if all I had was a .357 lever rifle and I really don't want to be shot with one, but it has a lot more limitations than the more commonly used big game calibers.
I say "ignorant" because, just like you, many guys seem to think that a 357 rifle is, as you state, a "least effective" choice. My point was, and is, that it is faaaar from that. So just like them, you make assumptions based on zero experience, and those assumptions are flat-out wrong.
I am not talking about people seeking opinions being ignorant. You should learn how to read for meaning. I am talking about guys, just like you, that form an opinion based on nothing, and then push that opinion as factual. That's what makes you look like an idiot, because that's what idiots do: they form opinions based on no facts, and then push those opinions as if they have validity.
You seemed to want to turn my reply into an attack on Moosemike. Why would I do that? He is just asking questions. I am attacking all those guys who voice beliefs that have zero factual basis. They are literally misleading the questioner, just as you are.
The 357 out of a rifle, loaded to the top, with the right bullet, is not your j-frame with 125 jhps. It is not "least effective" or "minimal" in any way. It is a hammer that penetrates some feet of tissue and makes a good wound channel. What it doesn't do is transmit high-velocity trauma to soft tissue, but it makes better wound channels than 25 caliber bullets at moderate rifle velocities. We aren't talking about shooting rimfires at big game, here. We are talking about a 1"-1.5" permanent channel for some feet when using the right bullet. I've killed moose and elk with that.
But please, feel free to keep on showing your ass. And remember, opinions aren't facts. Stop confusing the two.
