Which is a more deadly gun?

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?

 

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.

 

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

 

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

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

Well, what loads do you want to compare? 125 gr semi jacketed hollow point out if the .357 and a 135 gr .40 of similar construction? Sectional density effects penetration. Cross section effects drag through tissue. What targets are we talking about? What kind of clothing if human or hair and skin composition if game animal? What kind of weather? How is the target facing the shooter? Are ther intermediate objects that must be penetrated? How about bone? What kind if jacket material and design is used in the load? How about the core? Is the jacket bonded to the core? How good is the shooter. Where is the target hit and at what angle to vital organs? How consistent us the chosen bullet in expansion and or fragmentation? Is the target wearing armor? Is the target using performance enhancing drugs or under the influence if narcotics? Is the target likely to have a strong emotional response to getting shot? Does the target have a strong autonomic fight or flight response?

Things that ballistics tables don't take into account. There are more. These are both handguns, so they are both marginal. Use a shotgun or rifle to be sure.

 

Unless you plan to throw them at the target you would need a lot more information than you are providing. The only question you have asked that can actually be answered is about barrel length being important. The answer is yes.

 

You have no idea how nice it was to see your non-answer to the original overly vague question. As phrased there is no way in the world to answer the question originally posted, but amazingly enough a few people tried. Thank you.

 

I say the claw hammer with the 12" stainless and rubber handle .... The valocity will very depending on how pissed she is when she throws it ...

 

The answer was no longer just to your post but also to some who replied. Sorry.

Ballistics charts give some useful info on basic ballistic performance of the round through air. Ballistics gel tests can give an idea of how projectiles act when they hit a fluid filled media. Many people want the black and white results of that data to neatly fit into how the bullet will cause a animal or human assailant to respond to a hit from one of the tested projectiles. It often is not as simple an association as people want it to be.

There are lots of good videos on YouTube of how different rounds perform on ballistic gel when fired from different barrel lengths. They are often provided with velocity info. Use their search feature for a specific round and if you want snub nose info, include that in the search.

[ame="http://http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G_BPDmy4SfQ&feature=related"]http://http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G_BPDmy4SfQ&feature=related[/ame]

http://http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=Wuz_RHkS0aU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DWuz_RHkS0aU

Here are a couple vids of .357 snub by performance and .40 S&W performance in ballistics gel with velocity info. Both are Gold Dot "short barrel" loads but one is 135 gr and the other is 180. But Brass Fetcher videos provide some pretty good raw data with most of their videos that let's you see some of the variables and observation that they get during tests.

 

Either is not a bad choice, but a miss with either is not deadly at all.

 

If there is any difference it would be neglible in a real world shooting.

 

Not exactly. The barrel on the semi holds the cartridge so you have to deduct the cartridge length from the barrel length to get a truer picture. The link below will give you most of the cartridges and how they perform in different length barrels as well as semi and revolver.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/22.html