Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > General Handgun Discussion > Which is a more deadly gun?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-14-2013, 01:49 AM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sonic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Minneapolis,Minnesota
Posts: 2,901
Liked 749 Times on 477 Posts
Likes Given: 586

Default Which is a more deadly gun?

For all you ballistic guys. What is more deadly at 25 yards, a .40 SW with a 3.9" barrel or a .357 leaving a 1.875" barrel? or is barrel length even that important?



__________________
“He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.”
― Alexander Hamilton

The comments made herein are those solely of this writer and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency, or entity.
Sonic82 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 01-14-2013, 02:23 AM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,058
Liked 1917 Times on 1143 Posts
Likes Given: 410

Default

Too many more factors to consider and took many variables. Both can kill someone at that range so they could be considered equally deadly. A .22 can kill someone at that range so it could be considered equally deadly.

What do you really want to know?



__________________
SSGN_Doc is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 02:33 AM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 460
Liked 114 Times on 88 Posts
Likes Given: 111

Default

If this is simply a ballistics question - energy at yards - it becomes a table look-up task.
But the table won't be even because you are comparing different barrel lengths and revolver to semi-auto. Revolvers have some pressure loss between the cylinder and the barrel.
Longer barrels contain the pressure longer - providing more power (energy/velocity) to the projectile. The very short 357 barrel will burn some of it's powder outside the barrel - losing some power for the projectile.

In practical terms... both would be deadly.

__________________
Colby is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 02:39 AM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
austin92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Indiana
Posts: 825
Liked 181 Times on 134 Posts

Default

I'd guess the .357 would marginally carry more velocity and energy

__________________
austin92 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 02:50 AM   #5
FAA licensed bugsmasher
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ScottA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Davenport,IA
Posts: 6,613
Liked 1992 Times on 1080 Posts
Likes Given: 716

Default

Reminds me of when someone asked what is the safest airplane.

The Piper Cub... it can only barely kill you.

__________________

Scott

Quote:
If you're not representing Jesus in a way that makes people want to hang out with you, you're doing it wrong.
Quote:
Those who refuse to participate in politics shall be governed by their inferiors. -Plato
Regent Holdings What you need to know about silver, gold, and the economy.

Join the NRA
ScottA is offline  
rjd3282 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 02:59 AM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 460
Liked 114 Times on 88 Posts
Likes Given: 111

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by austin92 View Post
I'd guess the .357 would marginally carry more velocity and energy
Yeah.
The 357 mag has been considered kind of the standard for a powerful hand gun for many years - not considering the super powerful very large guns like 44 mag.

But I bet it would be close - between the 357 and the 40 cal out of the guns and barrels named.
__________________
Colby is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 02:59 AM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sonic82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Minneapolis,Minnesota
Posts: 2,901
Liked 749 Times on 477 Posts
Likes Given: 586

Default

Maybe deadly was a poor choice of words. One or the other has more energy, mass and impact or whatever. If you substituted a .32 caliber for one of them it would be a easy question. No difference here except the two are closer...takes more mathematics. The gases leaving a revolver as mentioned is a relevant factor I would guess.

__________________
“He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.”
― Alexander Hamilton

The comments made herein are those solely of this writer and in no way reflect the opinions of any other person, agency, or entity.
Sonic82 is offline  
danf_fl Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 03:21 AM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 2,675
Liked 2141 Times on 969 Posts
Likes Given: 2083

Default

The 40 can't compete with the 357 no matter what guns are used. The 40 simply can't match the power of the 357.

__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 03:25 AM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 460
Liked 114 Times on 88 Posts
Likes Given: 111

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic82 View Post
Maybe deadly was a poor choice of words. One or the other has more energy, mass and impact or whatever. If you substituted a .32 caliber for one of them it would be a easy question. No difference here except the two are closer...takes more mathematics. The gases leaving a revolver as mentioned is a relevant factor I would guess.
The ballistics tables are set up for measuring muzzle energy/velocity and energy/velocity at marked distances. This is measured stuff - straightforward to do this. But rounds are shot out of specified length guns - because barrel length does make a difference. Short barrels lose some energy.
As for the revolver cartridges - they are shot out of a revolver - so there are some pressure losses at the cylinder/barrel. So the measured energy out of the revolver includes the loss at the cylinder/barrel. The 357 mag is basically a revolver cartridge so the tables should reflect measured energy out of a revolver - with a certain barrel length.
The semi-auto - no loss there.
But the barrel length is a variable here. A 1 3/4 inch barrel is not the norm for testing. So the 357 energy out of that short a barrel would be somewhat less than a standard test barrel.
The 357 has been around a long time - I'm certain tests with short barrels vs long barrels has been done.

Google is your friend.
__________________

Last edited by Colby; 01-14-2013 at 12:39 PM.
Colby is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 03:25 AM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
303tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 3,297
Liked 1057 Times on 728 Posts
Likes Given: 1071

Default

Yes the .357 mag. would carry more velocity and energy....................



__________________

When all else fails.

303tom is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
How Deadly are Firearms. Shade Legal and Activism 20 10-17-2011 12:48 AM
How deadly is a .410 with 3" 7.5 shells zqwerty General Shotgun Discussion 1 05-08-2010 11:11 PM
Use of Deadly Force in Self-Defense? Angrypoonani Politics, Religion and Controversy 12 03-08-2009 06:11 PM
New, deadly, shotgun Musket The Club House 4 02-17-2009 04:47 PM
Beautiful and deadly Quasi The Club House 3 06-24-2008 01:21 AM