Does anyone have any experience with the 357 on big game with a rifle? Looking at a marlin carbine for new hunter to be used as a deer and black bear and maybe elk one day to distances of about 100-150 yards
At the muzzle, a 180gr 357 bullet has energy about like a 35 Remington at 150 yards. Will this kill a deer or elk or black bear...yes, definitely with good shot placement. The issue will be that even bonded .357 carbine bullets don't always exit whitetails. On even a medium sized black bear or cow elk you'll probably be in for a long tracking job without much of a blood trail. Probably not a good choice for a new hunter for anything but whitetail at timber ranges.
30-30 can be used in a similar platform and shoots a lot flatter and is still pretty mild and will have both more range and more killing power and with 170gr bullets you have a much higher chance of an exit and more blood to follow.
I should have mentioned that this new hunter is cartridge restricted due to state law. They have a Marlin 39 Mountie so i thought the little marlin carbine would be a good transition and a friend has the 357 for sale...
What about hard cast bullets?
If they lived up by me...id say 7-08 or perhaps a 260
I developed a load for my Marlin 1894 .357 carbine using the Hornady 180 gr XTP with 14.8 of Hodgon's Lil'gun. Kilt a big Doe one deer with the load at 25 yards...she tried to regain her feet for about 10 yards and fell over.
I should have mentioned that this new hunter is cartridge restricted due to state law. They have a Marlin 39 Mountie so i thought the little marlin carbine would be a good transition and a friend has the 357 for sale...
What about hard cast bullets?
If they lived up by me...id say 7-08 or perhaps a 260
....................Just go with the good 'ol 30-30 if you can in that state.
Was with a buddy when he shot a doe at about 20 yards with a 125 JHP in a six inch smith. Passed through and she went maybe 20 yards. Case of one. Seems a bad idea for elk. And not a good idea for 100 yard shots. Lots of better stuff out there
Was with a buddy when he shot a doe at about 20 yards with a 125 JHP in a six inch smith. Passed through and she went maybe 20 yards. Case of one. Seems a bad idea for elk. And not a good idea for 100 yard shots. Lots of better stuff out there
I shot a nice Iowa buck (estimated at 220 to 230 lbs) with a 6" revolver at about 20 yards with a 160 grain soft point. The bullet cut the aorta out of the top of his heart and he went 110 yards and was DRT. The bullet went in .357 and the came out the other side .357 as well. Next time I will use a 125 JHP. I would put a .357 at 50 to 75 yards max for a clean killing shot.
I've killed a bunch of deer with my .357 carbines and at woods ranges it is very effective. Don't listen to the armchair quarterbacks that haven't used it,. 158 gr. JSP's always exited on broadside shots for me and no deer went more than 50 yards after taking one through the lungs. A .357 carbine is a lot more gun than a .357 revolver. I've never shot an elk so can't give any advice there. Personally I'd want more than a .357 for anything bigger than deer.
Why, when you could shoot a tube feed carbine in 30-30 or 35 Rem for deer and elk. Out of a revolver a 44 Mag is a 75 yard deer and elk round with 300 gr bullets. Out of a 44 Mag carbine it is good to 125 yards. Out of a 444 Marlin carbine it is a 200 yard gun with .430 bullets weighing 300 gr. A 357 Mag with 180 gr bullet doesn't even scratch the surface of a 44 Mag with 300 gr. load let alone a 444 Marlin load. Can't see using a 357 Mag at 100-150 yards on big game, but that's just me.
Having an inexperienced hunter go after elk with a .367 sounds like a recipe for lost animals. .357 on deer is okay at short ranges and with food shot placement. Inexperienced hunters can’t be counted on for superior shot placement, so IMHO go with a bigger straight wall cartridge that will allow for only okay shot placement.
I might carry a 357 carbine for protection against black bears and mountain lions...maybe. But I wouldn't go hunting for them with it. And I'd feel awful self conscious about hunting an elk with one.
According to some folks here bullet placement is most important.. You should be fine. Even a .22lr should do it according to this philosophy!!! For me that is bs..
Just curious, what state limits one to a 357? They will get a close range deer, would not try an Elk, unless really close. Heard of Shotgun only, and bullet size, velocity/energy restrictions but never 357 only/max.
I agree with others here. OK out to 50-75 yds on whitetail deer with good shot placement. I would not use it for Black Bear or Elk. Good chance you might not recover the animal. Bear and Elk are tough animals. They are more muscular and thicker than deer. Probably would not get a pass through with a 357. It makes it much more difficult to track them with only an entrance hole.
Just curious, what state limits one to a 357? They will get a close range deer, would not try an Elk, unless really close. Heard of Shotgun only, and bullet size, velocity/energy restrictions but never 357 only/max.
No limit to a 357 but several Midwest states have cartridge restrictions in place. The idea of the 357 is simply that I have a friend who is selling one and another friend in a restricted area that needs a deer (and someday elk) rifle for a young hunter.
thinking it maybe just the ticket after reading the posts here...with the assumption that the “someday elk”is not part of the equation.
The "stay at home order" has me cruising this site more often now. I seldom contribute, just read others comments. However on this subject I feel I can contribute. I was a big game guide for 9 years, mostly deer and elk. Have been in on over 100 elk kills and the same number of mule deer and antelope. I used the 357 on 3 mule deer, all does and one good sized buck antelope. I used Remington 158 grain JHP's on all backed by 15 grains of 2400. I was not impressed at all on its killing power. Most required several hits and considerable time to die. Before these experiences I believed some of the hype and crawled into a black bears den to finish off a wounded bear with a 357. I was young and inexperienced at the time. On elk I would vote a definite "no". They can take a lot of lead to stop on occasion. However in controlled conditions everything is possible. I know a guide that killed 2 elk with a Colt Woodsman 22, and both elk were dead before the echo was gone.
We haven't caught a 158 XTP in a deer yet, including some quartering shots. I load the FP version with 17.5 grn of Lil'Gun for a Marlin 1894 and Ruger 77/.357.
Why not get the .357 now and worry about the elk rifle when "someday" happens?
For elk an absolute NO!!!. For deer , maybe at 75 yds or closer & a smallish deer at 100 lbs or under. A 250 lb+ muley , no. The possibility of wounded & lost game is to high . Spend the money & get a more suitable rifle.
The "stay at home order" has me cruising this site more often now. I seldom contribute, just read others comments. However on this subject I feel I can contribute. I was a big game guide for 9 years, mostly deer and elk. Have been in on over 100 elk kills and the same number of mule deer and antelope. I used the 357 on 3 mule deer, all does and one good sized buck antelope. I used Remington 158 grain JHP's on all backed by 15 grains of 2400. I was not impressed at all on its killing power. Most required several hits and considerable time to die. Before these experiences I believed some of the hype and crawled into a black bears den to finish off a wounded bear with a 357. I was young and inexperienced at the time. On elk I would vote a definite "no". They can take a lot of lead to stop on occasion. However in controlled conditions everything is possible. I know a guide that killed 2 elk with a Colt Woodsman 22, and both elk were dead before the echo was gone.
If all that was from a .357 CARBINE then your shot placement sucked, plain and simple. From a carbine, muzzle velocity is generally 400-500+ fps higher than the same loads fired from a 6" revolver turning the .357 into a completely different animal. Those here saying the .357 CARBINE is only effective on deer at 50-75 yards are also full of shyt. When fired from a carbine, retained velocity/energy is significantly higher at 100 yards than the same load fired from a 6" revolver has at the muzzle. My Marlin proved effective on deer well beyond 100 yards on more than one occasion.
The "stay at home order" has me cruising this site more often now. I seldom contribute, just read others comments. However on this subject I feel I can contribute. I was a big game guide for 9 years, mostly deer and elk. Have been in on over 100 elk kills and the same number of mule deer and antelope. I used the 357 on 3 mule deer, all does and one good sized buck antelope. I used Remington 158 grain JHP's on all backed by 15 grains of 2400. I was not impressed at all on its killing power. Most required several hits and considerable time to die. Before these experiences I believed some of the hype and crawled into a black bears den to finish off a wounded bear with a 357. I was young and inexperienced at the time. On elk I would vote a definite "no". They can take a lot of lead to stop on occasion. However in controlled conditions everything is possible. I know a guide that killed 2 elk with a Colt Woodsman 22, and both elk were dead before the echo was gone.
If all that was from a .357 CARBINE then your shot placement sucked, plain and simple. From a carbine, muzzle velocity is generally 400-500+ fps higher than the same loads fired from a 6" revolver turning the .357 into a completely different animal. Those here saying the .357 CARBINE is only effective on deer at 50-75 yards are also full of shyt. When fired from a carbine, retained velocity/energy is significantly higher at 100 yards than the same load fired from a 6" revolver has at the muzzle. My Marlin proved effective on deer well beyond 100 yards on more than one occasion.
Well that’s because you are John J. Rambo of the Adirondacks. 😆
The "stay at home order" has me cruising this site more often now. I seldom contribute, just read others comments. However on this subject I feel I can contribute. I was a big game guide for 9 years, mostly deer and elk. Have been in on over 100 elk kills and the same number of mule deer and antelope. I used the 357 on 3 mule deer, all does and one good sized buck antelope. I used Remington 158 grain JHP's on all backed by 15 grains of 2400. I was not impressed at all on its killing power. Most required several hits and considerable time to die. Before these experiences I believed some of the hype and crawled into a black bears den to finish off a wounded bear with a 357. I was young and inexperienced at the time. On elk I would vote a definite "no". They can take a lot of lead to stop on occasion. However in controlled conditions everything is possible. I know a guide that killed 2 elk with a Colt Woodsman 22, and both elk were dead before the echo was gone.
If all that was from a .357 CARBINE then your shot placement sucked, plain and simple. From a carbine, muzzle velocity is generally 400-500+ fps higher than the same loads fired from a 6" revolver turning the .357 into a completely different animal. Those here saying the .357 CARBINE is only effective on deer at 50-75 yards are also full of shyt. When fired from a carbine, retained velocity/energy is significantly higher at 100 yards than the same load fired from a 6" revolver has at the muzzle. My Marlin proved effective on deer well beyond 100 yards on more than one occasion.
Well that’s because you are John J. Rambo of the Adirondacks. 😆
Hey carrot brain. Still trying to figure out how to tie your own shoes this afternoon ?
Blackheart brought up a point that I failed to mention. All my experiences , a total of 4 not counting the wounded bear, were with handguns. Two deer with a 8 3/8" barreled revolver and 2 with a 6" barreled revolver. And he also mentioned my shot placement sucked. Damn I didn't know there were any witnesses to my shooting. And yes on two of the animals shot placement was iffy. But one doe shot through the lungs stayed alive for a good 15 minutes and was still breathing when found. The buck antelope was perfect placement and did the usual 100 yard death run. A carbine would sure be a great improvement in energy and shot placement. I take no exception to his comments on my shooting. However ALWAYSOUTDOORS call me "Rambo of the Adirondacks" which my wife DID NOT call me when she found out about my encounter in the bear den. She was of a different opinion than ALWAYS. She called me "The Forest Gump of the Rockies".
The "stay at home order" has me cruising this site more often now. I seldom contribute, just read others comments. However on this subject I feel I can contribute. I was a big game guide for 9 years, mostly deer and elk. Have been in on over 100 elk kills and the same number of mule deer and antelope. I used the 357 on 3 mule deer, all does and one good sized buck antelope. I used Remington 158 grain JHP's on all backed by 15 grains of 2400. I was not impressed at all on its killing power. Most required several hits and considerable time to die. Before these experiences I believed some of the hype and crawled into a black bears den to finish off a wounded bear with a 357. I was young and inexperienced at the time. On elk I would vote a definite "no". They can take a lot of lead to stop on occasion. However in controlled conditions everything is possible. I know a guide that killed 2 elk with a Colt Woodsman 22, and both elk were dead before the echo was gone.
If all that was from a .357 CARBINE then your shot placement sucked, plain and simple. From a carbine, muzzle velocity is generally 400-500+ fps higher than the same loads fired from a 6" revolver turning the .357 into a completely different animal. Those here saying the .357 CARBINE is only effective on deer at 50-75 yards are also full of shyt. When fired from a carbine, retained velocity/energy is significantly higher at 100 yards than the same load fired from a 6" revolver has at the muzzle. My Marlin proved effective on deer well beyond 100 yards on more than one occasion.
Well that’s because you are John J. Rambo of the Adirondacks. 😆
Hey carrot brain. Still trying to figure out how to tie your own shoes this afternoon ?
If a kid/new hunter can't reliably place his/her shots in the vitals they aren't ready to go hunting period. Anybody who can reliably place their shots through a deer's lungs at 100 yards will make meat with an accurate .357 carbine.
I'd have no trouble hunting deer, big eared or not, with a 357 Mag rifle. My boys have shot 6 with one here in IN. None have made it 20yds from the shot, the furthest being 90yds. First one made me a believer. Shot at 30yds directly through the sternum and found the bullet under the hide of one of the hams. All were taken with 158gr Hornady XTP-HP
Good way to ruin a kid by seeing his first beautiful deer run off never to be seen again because he was shot with a P shooter.
LC
I don't see anywhere the OP mentioned Mule deer.
Even the whitetail does that I see almost every day here at home are bigger than any Collie that I've ever seen.
Although I have killed a number of both mule and whitetail does with .22 LR bullets (all one shot kills and NO losses), I would not recommend a .22 LR to anyone for hunting deer, nor would I recommend a .357 rifle for a new hunter for hunting deer, and definitely NOT for hunting elk.
I have a friend that kills his elk almost every year with his .44 mag revolver, but he IS NOT a new hunter. Many years ago I killed an elk with an arrow from a spot and stalk 10 yard shot. I'm sure I could have killed that bull just as easily with one of my .44 mag revolvers and probably with one of my .357 revolvers, but a .357 would definitely NOT be my first choice weapon.
Yes, a rifle will add 400 or so feet/second over the velocity of the same bullet out of a revolver, but IMO that still doesn't make a .357 mag a 100 yard deer cartridge, and definitely NOT an elk cartridge, especially for a new hunter.
Opinions vary and everybody's got one. The opinion of those who have actually done it are perhaps worth a bit more than those who have not. Notice everyone in this thread who has actually killed deer with a .357 carbine has been positive in their results. The extra 500 fps from a carbine virtually doubles the energy with 158 gr bullets and makes a big difference in bullet action and wound trauma over a 6" revolver.
What becomes most apparent is how utterly stupid state game and fish commissions are. Trying to protect against high performance centerfire overreach and forcing hunters into an inferior cartridge so game animals have a higher probability of being wounded and become some coyotes feast. Banning bottlenecks like a 30-30, 35 Rem or straight wall 375 Win or other straight wall tube feed lever cartridges makes zero sense. A modern shotgun rifled sabot or muzzleloader now has a 200 yard reach.
What becomes most apparent is how utterly stupid state game and fish commissions are. Trying to protect against high performance centerfire overreach and forcing hunters into an inferior cartridge so game animals have a higher probability of being wounded and become some coyotes feast. Banning bottlenecks like a 30-30, 35 Rem or straight wall 375 Win or other straight wall tube feed lever cartridges makes zero sense. A modern shotgun rifled sabot or muzzleloader now has a 200 yard reach.
A .357 carbine is plenty of gun at normal woods ranges. Ballistics notably superior to my .50 cal. Hawken with 80 grs. of Goex black powder and patched round ball, yet few would argue the suitability of the .50 cal. ball on deer in the woods.
Not arguing the point of a 357 Mag or even 44 Mag just stating the state restriction is stupid regarding bullet reach when it comes to utilizing other shorter range more powerful cartridges.
Pharmseller, there are others .. Some new inventions, the older 38-55, the .44 mag. & the .45-70... I am not sure of all the new rounds that are straight walled. For deer at woods ranges .the .357 would be okay. I have killed several with it.. But when you through elk into the mix, it is a whole different ball game..
Not arguing the point of a 357 Mag or even 44 Mag just stating the state restriction is stupid regarding bullet reach when it comes to utilizing other shorter range more powerful cartridges.
when I was in Alaska I was fishing with a friend. he decided to kill a small bull moose with a 38 special. which he did.. but he shot him 6 times and eventually the moose died.. but got swept away by a fast moving river, and he never got the moose... I had tried to stop him from shooting the moose but to no availe.. It broke up our friend ship and I never went with him anyplace again.. it was a terrible painful thing for the Moose case in point .. you can kill a moose with a 38, but not recommended.
450 bushmaster is another popular choice down there as well. The benefit as I see it for the 357 is that the young shooter has an almost identical 39 so they are very comfortable with the manual of arms etc. also cheap 38spl for lots of practice which is far more important than caliber choice imho
I’m gathering it would make a good deer/black bear rig but no dice for elk. Most folks never actually get after elk out this way anyways. It’s a tough tag to draw
Thanks everyone for the help. I must say...the thought of a 357 for deer in a light fast carbine sound sounds fun! I can’t imagine it would have any recoil. I kind of want one now lol
Didn't read the thread but I have not been impressed by the 357 for deer and hogs and wouldn't even consider it for elk. But I have never shot an elk with one and probably never will. Have used a 45 Colt with hefty loads of 280-310 grain loads on some game and like it a lot.
What becomes most apparent is how utterly stupid state game and fish commissions are. Trying to protect against high performance centerfire overreach and forcing hunters into an inferior cartridge so game animals have a higher probability of being wounded and become some coyotes feast. Banning bottlenecks like a 30-30, 35 Rem or straight wall 375 Win or other straight wall tube feed lever cartridges makes zero sense. A modern shotgun rifled sabot or muzzleloader now has a 200 yard reach.
A .357 carbine is plenty of gun at normal woods ranges. Ballistics notably superior to my .50 cal. Hawken with 80 grs. of Goex black powder and patched round ball, yet few would argue the suitability of the .50 cal. ball on deer in the woods.
Opinions vary and everybody's got one. The opinion of those who have actually done it are perhaps worth a bit more than those who have not. Notice everyone in this thread who has actually killed deer with a .357 carbine has been positive in their results. The extra 500 fps from a carbine virtually doubles the energy with 158 gr bullets and makes a big difference in bullet action and wound trauma over a 6" revolver.
+1!
My brother and I both started our daughters with .357 mag carbines. We also taught them how to shoot! My girl makes her own reloads and loves to shoot her Ruger 77. She's comfortable with her rifle and not scared of it. My niece is slightly older and has since moved up to a 7-08 shooting 130grn Speers, but I am completely convinced that the .357 carbines were the perfect starter rifles for them. They are a lot of fun to shoot and that encourages more practice.
My girl and I both shot bucks from the same treestand, one year apart. Both bucks walked out of the same tangled patch of brush and were standing within 10 yards of each other when shot. The shots were quartering away at about 40 yards, hit in the ribs and angled to the front of the off shoulder. Both bucks ran approximately the same distance and dropped. Her buck had a massive blood trail, mine never had a drop. Her 158 XTP exited. My 180grn Accubond from a .338-06 didn't!
Don't get caught up on what paper numbers say should happen. It doesn't always work out that way.
Pharmseller, there are others .. Some new inventions, the older 38-55, the .44 mag. & the .45-70... I am not sure of all the new rounds that are straight walled. For deer at woods ranges .the .357 would be okay. I have killed several with it.. But when you through elk into the mix, it is a whole different ball game..
Deer with a 180gr XTP, YES, if I was bound and determined to press the 357 mag into service for elk, it'd be with the largest meplat hard cast flat nosed gas check cast bullet that would function through the rifle, it would also weigh at least 180 grains, with 200 being even better, the hard cast flat nosed bullets will cut a good bleeder hole, with two of course being ideal, if he stands still after the shot like I've seen a few elk do, lever his ass with 5 more.
A .357 rifle for whitetail to 100yds. should work, longer shots become questionable. Bear and elk definately not my choice under any circumstances, bigger tougher critters require a more powerful cartridge than .357.
44 mag in a rifle is a fine choice for deer around 100 yards. As you go past 100 and out to 200 bullet drop really starts to kick in with a .44. If someone is planning to shoot much past 100 with a .44 rifle they need a good understanding of bullet drop and holdover.
If hunting in heavy timber or brush where shots are going to be close, then .44 is a fine choice for deer.
I’ll let the experienced elk hunters chime in for elk purposes.
I seriously doubt that any of those suggesting .357 for elk have ever butchered an elk. They're a far different animal than a whitetail or mule deer, much thicker hide, muscles and heavier bone. Not a task for .357 Magnum under any circumstances.
Deer with a 180gr XTP, YES, if I was bound and determined to press the 357 mag into service for elk, it'd be with the largest meplat hard cast flat nosed gas check cast bullet that would function through the rifle, it would also weigh at least 180 grains, with 200 being even better, the hard cast flat nosed bullets will cut a good bleeder hole, with two of course being ideal, if he stands still after the shot like I've seen a few elk do, lever his ass with 5 more.
This^^^^^^
If a deer that can take a good hit from a 180 XTP at 1,700 FPS and walk away is not going to die from anything. I don’t know if I’d have no problem poking a bull in the ribs with a 200-215 grain hard cast at the same speed at 100-200 yards. Getting a good, close, broadside shot at an elk is not an easy thing. Too many things can go wrong.
I seriously doubt that any of those suggesting .357 for elk have ever butchered an elk. They're a far different animal than a whitetail or mule deer, much thicker hide, muscles and heavier bone. Not a task for .357 Magnum under any circumstances.
I don't see anyone actually suggesting using the .357 Mag Carbine on elk as a good idea or are you yet another person that comments without reading? The general consensus looks like, people who have actually used a .357 Mag in a Carbine, say it works for deer under certain situations, and people who haven't used it out of a Carbine say it's not powerful enough.
Was with a buddy when he shot a doe at about 20 yards with a 125 JHP in a six inch smith. Passed through and she went maybe 20 yards. Case of one. Seems a bad idea for elk. And not a good idea for 100 yard shots. Lots of better stuff out there
I shot a nice Iowa buck (estimated at 220 to 230 lbs) with a 6" revolver at about 20 yards with a 160 grain soft point. The bullet cut the aorta out of the top of his heart and he went 110 yards and was DRT. The bullet went in .357 and the came out the other side .357 as well. Next time I will use a 125 JHP. I would put a .357 at 50 to 75 yards max for a clean killing shot.
kwg
your Iowa buck sounds just like my 44 mag (B92) axis deer story. I was using Hornady Lever revolution stuff. Since switched.
For deer, It’s good. I have 2 nephews that have killed multiple whitetails with a .357 mag lever gun. All shot from 50-120 yards. The 120 yard one was a large 12 point. They used 125 gr Remington HP. Recovered all the bullets just under the hide on the opposite side. I bought my son a 77/357 and went with 125 gr Rem JSP. He shot a spike buck at 70 yards. Clipped the bottom of the spine and left a quarter sized hole coming out. I was so impressed, I bought one for me. I would shoot black bear with it if I had the opportunity.
Those lever guns are a ton of fun to shoot. It will take a deer. If I was forced to use it on elk, I would definitely do as others have suggested and get some 180 grain hard cast lead and plan on keeping the shot very close and even then would only shoot if I felt it was 100%. I would not let my son hunt elk with it. I’d give him my 6.5 Grendel or 7mm-08. I also have a Ruger American in 450 BM that is fun to shoot and would use it if I was limited to straight wall cartridges.