The Difference between 357 Mag and 357 sig?


PDA






Columbus Archer
March 10, 2006, 08:52 PM
Just curious as to what the difference is between the 357 mag and sig? Is the sig closer to a 38 special strength wise?

If you enjoyed reading about "The Difference between 357 Mag and 357 sig?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
diesel_furry
March 10, 2006, 08:57 PM
The 357 mag is a 357 mag , more powerful shot from a revolver

the 357 sig is a necks down 40 , and used in semi auto pistols

factory the 357 mag is around 1300 fps to 1500 , and about 700+ ft lb's with bullets around 150 to 180gr give or take some

the 357 sig is 1350 fps and 510 ft lb's with 125 gr bullet

the mag is for hunting and the sig is for target and Self defense

3rdpig
March 10, 2006, 09:04 PM
You don't consider the 357 mag a self defense round? :what:

diesel_furry
March 10, 2006, 09:06 PM
the 357 mag will work for about anything you want to do with it

being target , self defense , hunting

just ponting out hunting to show the dif between the sig and mag

MCgunner
March 10, 2006, 09:20 PM
People, people, people, there's more to a cartridge than how much powder it holds. Compare SAAMI pressures. Now, 125 grain Sigs are supposed to approximate the .357 mag in an auto pistol, close I must say. However, the .40 with light bullets can do the same thing, so what's the point?????? I fail to see the need in the Sig round. Truth be told, it's more a marketing ploy by Sig Sauer than any advancement in ballistics. Agencies around the country, Texas Department of Public Safety included, were happy with the .357 mag for many years of its service and, so, naturally fell for the ploy. But, they'd be just as well armed with a .40 and the right ammo. :rolleyes: The .357 Sig is actually a .355, uses 9mm bullets, but the marketing department no doubt came up with the idea in the first place. I can hear it now, "they want .357 ballistics from an auto pistol, we'll give it to 'em!"

Now, the .357 mag is MUCH more versatile as an outdoor round while being one of the most effective self defense calibers you can get in a revolver. You can load it with 180 grain pills to shoot some fairly heavy game and even defend yourself against black bears. But, the Sig round is limited to not much more than the 125 grain pill they designed for duty weapons. I really got no use for the Sig round. I have plenty of faith in both my 9mms and my .45 ACP for self defense in an auto pistol. For outdoor use, I would have to put my faith in mostly the magnums from .357 up except for my favorite all time magnum, the .45 colt. :D I handload my .357 heavy loads to around 750 ft lbs. My .45 colt from the 7" barrel of my contender pushes 1000 ft lbs with a 300 grain bullet, near 900 ft lbs from my 4 5/8 inch Blackhawk. A standard SAAMI load pushes about 400 ft lbs with a 255 grain pill. Same HUGE case, different working pressures.

What makes these pills pretty close in velocity and energy, though, in the 125 grain loadings is the working pressure of the cartridges, not the volume of the case! The volume of the case is NOT that much different anyway being as the Sig round is larger in diameter, a bottle neck round. But, it's the working pressure that matters. This is why the puny little 9x19 parabellum can push 400+ ft lbs in a +P loading, pressure. It's a tiny little case, only marginally bigger than the .380 ACP, also a 9mm diameter bullet. But, the .380, chambered in blow back pocket pistols, works at MUCH lower working pressures. It is only 2mm shorter in case length. It's the pressure that is the difference.

jc2
March 10, 2006, 09:22 PM
For all practical purposes, there's not enough difference between the 9x19 and 357 SIG to make of difference.

On the other hand, the 10mm is the autoloader equivalent of the .357 Magnum. For all practical purposes, the .357 Magnum and 10mm are ballistic twins.

MCgunner
March 10, 2006, 09:54 PM
For all practical purposes, there's not enough difference between the 9x19 and 357 SIG to make of difference.

On the other hand, the 10mm is the autoloader equivalent of the .357 Magnum. For all practical purposes, the .357 Magnum and 10mm are ballistic twins.

Basically true loaded to potential. But, there are a lot of neutered .357 mags. The "standard" in .357 mag self defense, is the 125 grain load to about 550 ft lbs. But, you and I both know that's very light in the caliber. That's the standard that was used as a target for the Sig, though. Like I say, it is a marketing ploy, nothing more really. Even USES 9mm bullets! :rolleyes: I actually PREFER the 9x19. In a service gun, in +P+ loads, it can almost equal the Sig, come within 75 ft lbs anyway, and yet it can be had in super compact autos. The Sig round is fatter and loaded in a small auto, will give up a few rounds in the magazine just like it's .40 caliber parent case. The 9X19 is a more efficient package and absolutely enough gun for self defense, well, as enough as anything I reckon.

Anyway, I've never found a good, logical reason to shoot either .40 or .357 Sig. I would, however, see the use in the 10mm. It IS a .357 in an autoloader. Now, right there, you see why I think the Sig round is all about marketing. The 10 existed long before the Sig came out. The TDPS was looking for a "357 autoloader" and the 10 is the only common self defense caliber that equals the .357 magnum ballistically. If they'd have named the 10mm the ".357 auto magnum", it'd 've sold to the DPS. Instead, they settled on a lesser round because of the name! :rolleyes:

Graystar
March 10, 2006, 09:56 PM
The .357SIG exist for a single purpose...to provide the same high-powered round that is found in the typical .357 Mag police service revolver in a semi-auto package. This was because the .357 Mag service revolver has a very successful history in police work. The hope was to create a handgunl that could provide the same performance but also provide more rounds.

The .357SIG isnít as versatile as the revolver round and generally sticks to a narrow range of power. .357 Mag rounds are available that range from less powerful than .357SIG to far more powerful. But that's okay as long as you remember what the intent of this round is.

For all practical purposes, there's not enough difference between the 9x19 and 357 SIG to make of difference.
A Federal Premium .357SIG round produces 506 ft-lbs whereas an Federal Premium 9mm produces 353 ft-lbs. Thatís over 43% more energy. Thatís a big difference.

jc2
March 10, 2006, 10:36 PM
The .357SIG exist for a single purpose...
The 357 SIG exist for a single purpose--to sell handguns, period. It was part of an effort by SIG to reclaim the momentun they lost in the LE market-place (largely to Glock) because they were so slow in delivering a .40 S&W weapon.
to provide the same high-powered round that is found in the typical .357 Mag police service revolver in a semi-auto package.
Then it failed miserably--it falls well short of the .357 Magnum. They 357 SIG was hyped by SIG in as such but falls well short of that mark in actual practice. Basically, it is 9x19 in a short, fat case.
A Federal Premium .357SIG round produces 506 ft-lbs whereas an Federal Premium 9mm produces 353 ft-lbs. Thatís over 43% more energy. Thatís a big difference.
Not really. It's one of those numbers that looks big, but what is actually measured is rather small. Frankly, a 153 fpe is not enough difference to make a diiference--in actual enery, it is a very small amount

MCgunner
March 11, 2006, 12:00 AM
Well, I carry +P 9mm stuff that puts out 400 ft lbs, so it's down 100 ft lbs to the Sig load, but that's in a very compact pistol. In a full size gun, it makes 440 ft lbs, so it's down about 60+ ft lbs. That's not that significant IMHO. Now, consider that the parent .40 S&W case makes well over 500 ft lbs in it's lighter bullet loadings of 135 to 155 grains. Why the .357 sig when you have equal exterior ballistics with a bigger, heavier bullet in the .40????? Where's the need???? It's all about marketing, plain and simple. Call it a .357 and Law Enforcement will come.

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 12:16 AM
QUOTE
A Federal Premium .357SIG round produces 506 ft-lbs whereas an Federal Premium 9mm produces 353 ft-lbs. That’s over 43% more energy. That’s a big difference
END QUOTE

Not quite. Lets compare the Winchester Ranger +P+ grain 9mm at 1250 fps vs the 125 grian 357 sig at 1350fps. Thats 440 footounds for the 9mm vs 500 for the sig. Hardly anything to get worked up over.

The 40 is also not that much to get all worked up about either. It provides what, a mear .05 expansion over the 9mm with equal penetration figures. For that extra expansion you pay for with with more than 45 acp recoil. You pay a lot more for you ammo. You have guns wearing out much quicker and you have KB's. I no longer use the 40.
Pat

Graystar
March 11, 2006, 12:20 AM
Well, I carry +P 9mm stuff that puts out 400 ft lbs, so it's down 100 ft lbs to the Sig load, but that's in a very compact pistol. In a full size gun, it makes 440 ft lbs
Alright then...forget Federal and lets move to CORBON. 575 ft lbs for their .357SIG. Bottom line is that the power rating for 357SIG is well above 9mm.

Now, consider that the parent .40 S&W case makes well over 500 ft lbs in it's lighter bullet loadings of 135 to 155 grains. Why the .357 sig when you have equal exterior ballistics with a bigger, heavier bullet in the .40?????
It is my understanding that there are at least two significant reasons for using 357SIG over .40. The first is that the round appears to be a bit more accurate than the .40, which is not important for self-defense but important for policemen trying to take down a BG at a distance.

The second is that the smaller round has better penetration. Again, not important for personal defense but important for police who might have to shoot a BG through a car door or window.

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 12:26 AM
Wrong again graystar. With Corbon the 125 grain 357 sig is rated at 1450 fps. While the 125 grain 9mm Corbon is rated at 1250 fps. Thats only a difference of 150 footpounds still not enough to get worked up over. 583 for the sig and 433 for the 9mm. Besides energy is not that numbers you should be looking. Penetration and expansion figures are far more important. In that area the 9mm and 357 sig are identical.

Pat

Graystar
March 11, 2006, 12:42 AM
Wrong again graystar.What...you're saying that the 357SIG doesn't have a higher power rating??? I think you're the one that's wrong.

575 ft-lbs is well in the .357 Mag range of power. You're telling me that there's no difference between 9mm and .357 Mag??

You treat 150 ft-lbs like it's nothing when in fact it is a significant percentage of the 9mm's power rating. If it wasn't significant then we wouldn't need anything more than .38 special. 150 ft-lbs is significant.

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 12:54 AM
Take a look at the 357 sig jhps expansion and the 9mm pics. Tell me there is a significant difference.
Pat

Graystar
March 11, 2006, 01:04 AM
There's no difference, as there shouldn't be. I would fully expect manufactures to insure that the bullets used are of a design and appropriate hardness to allow full expansion at the specified power rating.

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:09 AM
A 12 inch hole that is .75 caliber from a 9mm is the same as a 12 inch hole from a .75 caliber 357 sig.
Pat

ROAshooter
March 11, 2006, 01:21 AM
Such a waste......we all KNOW..the 223/5.56 is....SUPERIOR......for everything!!!!!

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:24 AM
Go away pest. Only those who have something to contribute are welcome here. Personal attacks need not apply. Grow up and act like an adult.
Pat

ROAshooter
March 11, 2006, 01:29 AM
INSULTS.....from the mouth of babes

Devonai
March 11, 2006, 01:33 AM
As an armed security guard working at a large construction site third shift, I saw what the .357 Sig could do for me against barriers and heavy clothing and liked it. There are also plenty of places for a shot of 100 meters or more*, and I'm not authorized to carry a rifle in my vehicle.

I liked the 10mm Auto for the same reasons, but I was already carrying a Glock 22 so I ordered a factory .357 barrel from Glockmeister for $120.

I wasn't able to perceive any difference in recoil between the .40 and the .357 Sig, but both cartridges recoil less than a Glock 20 or 21 in my experience.

I conclude that the .357 Sig is slightly better than the .40 S&W in full-size pistols, but the difference is negated in shorter barrels. For my purposes, the .357 Sig wins.

*I'll be the first to admit that any increase in accuracy at 100 meters between the .40 and .357 Sig is probably moot considering the adrenaline dump of combat, but it can't hurt.

Devonai
March 11, 2006, 01:35 AM
WHOA! I spent too long composing my response!

Police Firearms Instructor.
Urban Rifle Instructor.
Colt M16/AR15 Armorer.
Glock Armorer.

ROA, have some respect for your contemporaries. It is possible to disagree about dynamic variables without resulting to personal attacks. :uhoh:

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:37 AM
That 100 fps does not buy you much range or barrier penetration ability at least not in the tests I have seen. Thats why I dropped the 357 sig. It is not a bad round it will perform. But its not significantly better than the 9mm. And it has its share of disadvantages.
Pat

Graystar
March 11, 2006, 01:39 AM
A 12 inch hole that is .75 caliber from a 9mm is the same as a 12 inch hole from a .75 caliber 357 sig.
I would tend to agree. But the .357SIG can do things that the 9mm can’t. Otherwise law enforcement across the country wouldn’t be moving away from 9mm to .40/357SIG. And that’s the thing to remember. This round wasn’t meant to compete in the personal self-defense arena. It was meant to do what a 357 Mag does in the hands of a policeman. Police don’t carry hollowpoints and, like I said, they have a need to do things like shoot a BG through a car door. 357SIG is simply a specialized round with a specific purpose and it must be reviewed with that in mind.

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:39 AM
To be honest I am not sure why he is following me from thread to thread acting like a kid. I guess I must have pissed him off with my opinions on pistol caliber carbines in the past.
Pat

ROAshooter
March 11, 2006, 01:42 AM
One only has to read past postings to see the many times 355sig has pissed people off

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:45 AM
Well believe it or not more cops still use the 9mm than any other caliber. That is due to the larger agencies like NYPD, LAPD, CPD. still issuing it. Trends change and percieved needs. Also ammo has improved. The ammo situation 10 years ago is not what it is today. The 9mm has benefited quite a bit from recent changes in bullet construction. I dropped the 357 sig when I learned about the Ranger +p+ 127 grain. The move is also not towards the 357 sig but rather to the 40sw. Its the compromise cartridge. 45 fans can live with it because it starts with .4 while 9mm fans get to keep their guns.
Pat

Devonai
March 11, 2006, 01:50 AM
And it has its share of disadvantages.

Yeah, it's a pistol round! :D I'd rather have my Remington 870 or my Garand out there.

I have owned a S&W 1006, but it only carried 9+1 rounds and it was a good deal heavier than my Glock 22. I have owned a USP .45 but it only carried 12+1 rounds. The Glock 22 gives me 18 rounds on my primary mag (thanks to a +2 baseplate) and 15 rounds for each spare mag, two more if I decide to order more +2 baseplates. That kind of firepower in .40 is great, and I like the slight increase in power levels of the Speer Gold Dot 125-grain .357 Sig (over the Speer GD 165-grain .40) gives me.

I'm on my own out there, and with the occasional trespasser or thief I know quite well that the police response time is approximately 15 minutes. Capacity is important to me.

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:52 AM
Have you approached your employers with the need for a good 223 caliber carbine or at the very least an 870 shotgun.
Pat

Graystar
March 11, 2006, 01:53 AM
The 9mm has benefited quite a bit from recent changes in bullet construction.
I agree. In fact my own personal defense gun is 9mm. And Iím not actually defending the 357SIG. Iím just saying that one needs to consider the design goal of a round when performing an evaluation.

Isnít that Ranger ammo available only to law enforcement?

355sigfan
March 11, 2006, 01:59 AM
Ranger is legal to own and you can buy it from sources on the internet. Heck I would get it for you if you lived near by. There are other good choices like the HST as well. The 357 sig was developed to copy the ballistics of the 125 grain 357 mag when fired from a 3 to 4 inch barrel. That it does.
Pat

Devonai
March 11, 2006, 02:07 AM
Have you approached your employers with the need for a good 223 caliber carbine or at the very least an 870 shotgun?

Heh, such a need exists only in our minds, not theirs. I'm just happy to have more than a S&W model 10.

Sergeant Sabre
March 11, 2006, 10:55 AM
It was meant to do what a 357 Mag does in the hands of a policeman. Police donít carry hollowpoints and...

They don't carry hollow point ammunition? :confused:

Maybe not where you live. I can't think of an agency that doesn't carry hollow points.

coylh
March 12, 2006, 12:58 PM
what the difference is between the 357 mag and sig?

I can get a Sig 229 in 357sig.

Surefire
March 12, 2006, 01:09 PM
The fundamental difference IMO is bullet weight. The .357 Sig is limited to lighter bullets. While 125 grain bullets might produce similar velocities in the two cartridges, the .357 Magnum wins at bullet weights greater than this.

The .357 Magnum can spit out 200 grain bullets approaching 1,200 feet per second. The .357 Sig doesn't even have bullets close to this weight.

senior
March 12, 2006, 03:22 PM
after reading the threads from both persons, i'll not argue the useful pro and cons of either, my only comment is has anyone made a comment about the wayyy big difference in the rounds if used for sd and having to fire in the dark? WOW ,now thats a heck of a difference, that 357 sig will not only blind u at night but damn near deafen u also for several moments, soooo, if fired at the bg, better make real sure you burn him good with the first shot, u wont be seeing or hearing him for a few, thats main reason i hate ported pistols, that and the darn extra work cleaning and how the ported barrrel flash hides the front sight with soot!

DonGlock26
March 12, 2006, 03:27 PM
I find the .357Sig to recoil less(torque) less than .40 in my P229. It is also much more accurate compared to the .40. I like it with a bonded bullet.

medmo
March 15, 2006, 04:27 AM
The 357 SIG was designed to duplicate the ballistics of a 125 grain 357 magnum defensive load and shoot from a 9mm/40cal sized frame. It does that pretty well. It's performance has tested to be about the same as a 357 magnum from a 3" to 4" bbl. Basing judgement on what the design goal was then it is a success. The 357 magnum offers much more variety of bullet weights and is more versatile ballistically. If I had to choose only one for all of life's handgun applications then the 357 magnum would be my choice.

bakert
March 15, 2006, 11:18 AM
The .357 magnum IS. The .357 Sig wants to be!!:D

jc2
March 15, 2006, 06:01 PM
Basing judgement on what the design goal was then it is a success.
The design goal was for SIGArms to reclaim the LE market share in lost to Glock when they were slow in bringing out a .40 S&W. I'd say it missed its goal by rather a large margin--both in terms of calibre (the .40 S&W far outstrips the 357 SIG in LE sales) and weapon sales (the Glock signficantly outsells SIG in LE). Using your criteria of "design goal," the 357 SIG has been a miserable failure (and I'm not even certain of its long-term viability).

Brad Johnson
March 15, 2006, 07:28 PM
Wow, such vitriol and ascetic barbs over what is essentially a non-issue.

To answer the original question...

The .357 Smith & Wesson Magnum was designed as a rimmed, straight-walled revolver cartridge. Original factory loadings were brutal. Very few factory loadings today duplicate the performance of these early offerings. The case design was simple - a straight tube with a rim at one end to hold it in the cylinder. Very utilitarian.

The .357 Sig was designed as a semi-auto cartridge. A "rimless" desgin, it began as an experiment to duplicate the terminal ballistics of the most-used (and well respected) 125 grain .357 mag revolver loads in a cartridge that could be used in a semi-auto. Originally using necked-down .40 S&W cases, designers were able to duplicate the 125gr .357 Mag performance in a cartridge that would fit in existing semi-auto handguns designed around .40/.9mm-length cartridges. (Note-the .357 Sig cases are now specifically designed to handle the higher chamber pressures and are drawn to difference specs than the .40 S&W)

The .357 Sig has suffered a fate similar to that of the 10mm. Original .357 Sig loads were impressive. However, LE agencies found their officers suffering from "don't wanna shoot it" problems due to the increase recoil and muzzle blast. As a result many factory .357 Sig loads were noticeably detuned to offer the shooters a more palatable combination. Unless original-spec cartridges are used, .357 Sig now offers no real ballistic advantages over other LE rounds in either .40 S&W, 10mm, or +P+ 9mm chamberings.

One inherent positive of the .357 Sig is the bottleneck case design. This design tends to be more forgiving of deficiencies in magazine and feedramp design. As a result it seems to suffer fewer feeding problems than similar straight-walled chamberings. The downside is that the shouldered design makes handloading the round a more exacting process, as the round headspaces on the shoulder and not the case mouth.

Brad

MCgunner
March 15, 2006, 07:39 PM
Hey, if you're sold on the Sig round, GREAT. It's effective as about any major caliber, of course. I'm not saying it's junk, worthless, etc. I'm just saying it sold on its name, not any significant performance improvement that other calibers didn't already offer. The last significant improvement in PDW calibers IMHO was the 10mm.

I carry the 9 because it's an effective major caliber that is chambered in some tiny guns which is what I carry for CCW, being just an armed civilian, not a security guard or LEO or anything. You can get the Sig in similar sized guns, there are barrel conversions out there for the Kel Tec and I assume the Glock 27, but I'll stick with the 9. I never liked the .40 in such small guns because they're pretty rough on a small action, but if the gun is designed for it, that might just be a paranoia of mine. Still, I'll take the extra round of my 9 over a forty in a small weapon, especially considering a box of practice ammo is 5.97 at Walmart here and I can't even justify reloading the caliber anymore at those prices.

No reason to get worked up over the debate. It has been interesting to see why some like the round. I still think it's redundant and not necessary and no real improvement in the world of sidearms, but it's made Sig a lot of money, so I can't say it's worthless. LOL

medmo
March 15, 2006, 07:59 PM
"Using your criteria of "design goal," the 357 SIG has been a miserable failure (and I'm not even certain of its long-term viability)."

R e a d S l o w e r O n e M o r e T i m e

I'm talking about the ballistic engineering desgin goal and nothing more. The engineers pretty much accomplished what they set out to do. Read the original post again and try to find the topic of discussion. You can do it!

jc2
March 15, 2006, 10:47 PM
Brad -

Wow, such misinformation over what is essentially a non-issue.

Actually, today's standard factory loading are as hot (or hotter) than the original Federal offerings. The 357 SIG has NOT "suffered a fate similar to that of the 10mm" as you allege (or the .357 Magnum). To be honest the 357 SIG offers no ballistic adavantage over any 9x19 current generation, premium JHP--standard, +P or +P+. Any advantages the bottle-neck case design offers is more theoretical than practical.

In fact, the tapered design of the 9x19 is probably better (again theoretically) than the bottle-neck of the 357 SIG. The bottle-neck design of the 357 SIG comes with its own set of reliability problems including a inherent tendency to nose-dive (particularly once your magazine springs start to weaken a little or the magazine gets a little dirty). It also as issues with case neck strength.

medmo -

B U T that's not what you said, was it? :)

--Or was I supposed to slow way down and read your mind? :D

At least, I didn't see anything about "engineering desgin [sic] goal" in your first post. The goal was was SIGArms to regain LE market share it lost to Glock--it failed.

medmo
March 16, 2006, 02:55 AM
jc2 - If you were applying what I said to the original topic that was posted then that is "actually" what I said. Again you failed. I know you can find the topic if you try really, really hard. Try harder. You can do it!

If you enjoyed reading about "The Difference between 357 Mag and 357 sig?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!