jwp475
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,084
|
Post by jwp475 on Jan 6, 2010 7:56:23 GMT -5
This is the one I would carry due to weight and proven one shot stop power! ;D What proof?
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Jan 6, 2010 11:39:46 GMT -5
I hope you aren't refering to Marshall and Sanow's faulty statistics.......
|
|
|
Post by rexster on Jan 7, 2010 4:16:28 GMT -5
I hope you aren't refering to Marshall and Sanow's faulty statistics....... While I don't agree with the way the Marshall/Sanow figures were derived, I can attest that the 125-grain Federal will cause a tremendous amount of damage to a human body, and on that particular night in 1993, it worked with just one shot. Here in Texas and the Southwest, enough peace officers had shot enough crooks, collectively, with the .357 to know it worked well. We didn't need a study published in a magazine, authored by guys up North. I felt well-armed. To this day, if I know I am going to be facing one, or even two human opponents, armed with handguns, I would be comfortable with the .357 mag in a sixgun. As it is, working a beat that straddles US 59, a major drug corridor, and with a business zone busier than all of Miami, FL, and containing an Israeli consulate, all by myself tonight, I think it reasonable to be carrying a double-stack .40 autoloader. Bad guys seem to run in packs more, lately, and carry AK and SKS rifles. By the way, even the gunwriter who probably did more than anyone to revive interest in the .44 Special, Skeeter Skelton, seemed to think highly of the .357 magnum, too, for peace officer use. I seem to recall him writing that an S&W Model 27, in a certain barrel length, was his favorite policing sixgun. Bill Jordan liked bigger bores, too, but seemed realistic about the usefulness and performance of the .357 mag, and was the Father of the Combat Magnum, a.k.a. the Model 19 these days. To be clear, I have nothing against the .44, or guys who prefer it. If my hands were big enough for N-frames, I might own a few so chambered. The subject of this post is a 5-shot .44 versus a 6-to7-shot .357 mag. I favor the latter.
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Jan 7, 2010 6:59:53 GMT -5
Had more LEOs been capable of carrying and using a .44 magnum, I think Marshall and Sanow's data would have been skewed in favor of the .44....... Nothing wrong with the .357, especially when loaded properly, but given the opportunity to carry a larger bore revolver (again, assuming that it is loaded properly), I choose the larger caliber -- I just prefer bigger holes in whatever I am shooting.
|
|
|
Post by rexster on Jan 7, 2010 8:20:43 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with bigger holes. The last cartridge I carried by choice, on duty, was .45 ACP, in 1911 pistols, which I "grandfathered" in 1997, when my PD standardized on .40 in specified double-action autoloaders for new hires, and for veterans switching to new guns for any reason. In 2002, I switched voluntarily to .40, after being satisfied with its track record on the street, over time. My P229 duty/carry pistols do a very good job of feeling like a good S&W K/L-framed sixgun, but holding twice as much ammo. Life is good. My sentimental favorite? .45 Colt, of course, an even bigger hole than .44 Special.
|
|
erich
.30 Stingray
Posts: 393
|
Post by erich on Jan 9, 2010 22:49:37 GMT -5
Sorry for the late reply, Gary - I do appellate criminal defense (used to do investigation and prosecution briefly), and my office handles the majority of the criminal appeals in New Mexico so I have personally handled a lot of these cases and I've consulted on many, many more.
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Jan 10, 2010 9:32:53 GMT -5
My sentimental favorite? .45 Colt, of course, an even bigger hole than .44 Special. Amen to that, Rexster!
|
|
sean
.240 Incinerator
Posts: 19
|
Post by sean on Jan 10, 2010 10:19:29 GMT -5
I'll take in any unwanted 696 "orphans" and give them a good happy home with lots to eat, and plenty of companionship..... Can I be in line behind you for orphan 696's?
|
|
dave
.240 Incinerator
Posts: 85
|
Post by dave on Jan 10, 2010 14:16:53 GMT -5
I got my answer just the other day at the range. Had a 44 Special 4" N-frame and a 357M 3.5" N-frame. Shot one right after the other and was reminded why I like the 44 Special so much. It is (for me) much more controlable than the full pressure Magnum. These were 240g hard cast SWC at about 850 or 900 fps. Not a target load but easier to get back on target with than the Magnum. Sure I could shoot 38 +Ps...but then it wouldn't be a Magnum then, would it.
Dave
|
|
don44
.30 Stingray
Posts: 153
|
Post by don44 on Jan 12, 2010 12:01:16 GMT -5
I would prefer the .44!
|
|
Steve
.30 Stingray
Posts: 211
|
Post by Steve on Jan 12, 2010 12:31:44 GMT -5
I have a S&W 340 PD HiViz with C T laser grips and a S&W 396 Night Guard also with C T laser grips. I prefer the 44 special as I can get much faster follow up shots with it. I am able to improve the follow up of the 340 by dropping down to 38 +P, but even then the 44 is faster back on target. The 396 Night Guard is a very fine CCW revolver, especially with the laser grips to back up the XS big dot night sights.
|
|
|
Post by Lee Martin on Jan 15, 2010 15:17:49 GMT -5
You could argue this one all day. The truth is, both are outstanding man-stoppers. Here are my daily CCWs: I'm fond of 5-shot 44 Spls though. While I don't own a 696, I've always been pleased with how my Bulldogs shoot: -Lee www.singleactions.com
|
|