Is the 4 inch 357 Magnum overrated???


PDA






Greg8098
November 18, 2006, 11:36 AM
I've always heard that the standard factory 125 gr. bullet exits the muzzle at approx. 1450 fps, therefore having a considerable lead over the 357 sig @ 1350 fps. But I now hear that the true velocity from the revolver is actually around 1350 fps :scrutiny: . Anyone know of this??

If you enjoyed reading about "Is the 4 inch 357 Magnum overrated???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Cousin Mike
November 18, 2006, 12:26 PM
First, 100 fps is a marginal difference. You can shoot ammo from the same box that might vary that much. Differences between .357 Mag and .357SIG are also minimal IMO. Same weight, same speed = same thing. The .357 Magnum (9x33mm) uses a much longer round than the .357SIG (9x21mm, IIRC), and since I'm not an expert I won't even pretend to know how that affects wounding capability.

If you want a .357, then IMHO, it should be all about the platform you want to shoot it from. Small & light, medium size/weight, or big & heavy? Capacity is another factor. Guns chambered for .357SIG usually hold 10-12 rounds. Most guns chambered for .357 Magnum are revolvers, and hold between 5 and 8 in the cylinder. The desert eagle is the only auto I know of chambered in .357 Magnum, and holds 7+1 IIRC.

.357 Magnum is a helluvalot louder than .357SIG, and the recoil is different. The .357 Magnum has been around for quite a while and has had a long time to prove itself - that's why most people prefer the .357 Magnum.

As for what the projectile is going to do to a human being, I'm of the belief that once you get above 9mm, it all does the same thing.

If you're like me and it seems too close to call, just get both. :)

Jim March
November 18, 2006, 12:37 PM
When we're talking 125gr full-house loads, the best rounds from specialty ammo houses such as Buffalo Bore and Doubletap exceed the 357Sig by a decent margin.

However, with the 357Mag you have three additional choices:

* Really light stuff such as the 38+P and even milder. 148gr target wadcutters at 700fps are awesome as newbie trainers.

* "Mild 357 loads" that still get the job done - see also this thread:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=235134

* "Superheavyweights" from 158gr through 200gr that are just impossible in autoloaders and give a "critter defense" edge the 357Sig can't match.

The 4" 357 is "all that" not just because it's the best manstopper around this side of a handcannon, but because it's -=flexible=- as well.

420Stainless
November 18, 2006, 12:46 PM
The .357 SIG was designed to duplicate the performance of the 125 grain .357 Mag hollowpoint for self-defense or for service purposes. That load was said to be the most effective one-shot stopper in some studies. The .357 SIG makes that load performance possible in a higher capacity semi-auto platform. If that is what you intend to use the weapon for, the semi-auto might be the best choice. I already have a .40, which supposedly is very near the same capability, so the .357 SIG doesn't really interest me.

I'm new to the .357 Mag., but I purchased the revolvers for the flexibility available. I can carry the 125 gr. load for self-defense, or I can plink with milder .38 special loads or choose a load with heavy bullets to hunt with.

Cousin Mike
November 18, 2006, 12:54 PM
Jim March is absolutely right... nothing beats the versatility/flexibility of the .357 Magnum revolver, and .357SIG doesn't have heavy loads available for hunting or critter defense. The 158gr. is the heaviest .357SIG available, IIRC.

My original post was only meant to reflect what differences may or may not exist in conventional SD loads, and in a self defense/CCW application, with 125gr. rounds. Should have been more clear about that.

up_onus
November 18, 2006, 12:59 PM
i wonder if 100 fps will make any difference for anything...need bigger? get a rifle or a carbine

MCgunner
November 18, 2006, 01:41 PM
Make mine a .357 a revolver, thank you. Versatility is the main reason, but my handloads in 125 grain destroy .357 Sig ballistics. I get 1600 fps from a 4" barrel. That pretty much puts the lid on the .357 Sig, makes about 700 fpe. Those ballistics are what the .357 was originally intended to do before the big ammo companies neutered their loads from fears of liability lawsuits. I like the revolver and caliber as a back country hiking gun with heavy 158 grain SWC loads and as a small game getter with my 148 grain .38 wadcutter load which shoots into an inch at 25 yards out of my Taurus M66 OR my 6.5" Blackhawk. I've killed deer at 50 yards with that 158 grain magnum load from my Blackhawk. I have an even better, flatter shooting load now consisting of a 180 grain Hornady XTP moving at about 1450 fps from that Blackhawk. That one is very accurate right out to 100 yards. It's only 2" high at 50 and dead on at 100 and with the Blackhawk's iron sights I can put them into 4" off the bench at 100 yards.

You simply can't do all that with the Sig. Yeah, it's a good self defense weapon, but that's ALL it is. If you like the outdoors like I do, the .357 4" revolver is a much more versatile weapon, that is, if you don't wish to own both. I rely on the .38, 9x19mm, and .45ACP with one gun in .380 for CCW self defense, though. My .357s are field guns carried open on a gun belt in a simple uncle mikes camo nylon holster. I gotta admit, though, I often leave the .357s at home and carry my .45 Colt.:D

i wonder if 100 fps will make any difference for anything...need bigger? get a rifle or a carbine

And, yep, I have a .357 Magnum 20" carbine and ballistics of the round from THAT gun dwarf any handgun. It's a really cool caliber, especially for the handloader. But, unlike a lot of calibers, you don't HAVE to be a handloader to enjoy the versatility of the guns in this caliber or be able to afford to shoot it. I think it's the first handgun round anyone should get. I know it was my first centerfire, though I had .22s before it.

S&W620
November 18, 2006, 01:55 PM
Personally I feel the 4 inch .357 mag is about as good as it gets. As others have pointed out, the versitility of the platform allows for such range in uses. Here are a few personal examples of how versitile this gun can be.

1. Took my girlfriend to the range about a month and a half ago for the first time. We have been dating for about 2 1/2 years and she is pretty much an "anti" when in comes to guns and has wanted nothing to do with my hobby. Needless to say I was happy she decided to tag along. After showing her proper safety, grip, stance, etc. I fired off a few stout .357's so she could have a visual of what I was telling her. She had an OMG look on her face because of the noise and such. I assured her she wouldn't be shooting the .357's, just some .38 wadcutters to get her feet wet. After exactly one shot of the .38's out of the Smith she nearly laughed and replied "that's it?". The weight of the gun makes shooting these rounds seem almost rediculously easy. It took about 50 rounds of .38's before she wanted to step up and try the .357's. Needless to say, she loved those too. I am now regretting ever taking her to the range in the first place as I seem to never get MY hands on the revolver any more when we go.;)

2. Couple of buddies went to the range about six month ago. They are mostly semi auto guys and thought that a .357 was an old man's gun. They were ragging on me about how great their .40's were and that I should get a "real" gun caliber and ditch the .357 and 9mm. It didn't take either of them long shooting Buffalo Bore's 180 gr. round to realize that they had no idea what they were talking about. Ever since both have been in love with the magnum.

In short is the .357 overrated? No.

JShirley
November 18, 2006, 02:12 PM
The .357 is good for a lot of things. I'm picking up a Blackhawk .357/9mm convertible when I'm home on leave in two weeks.

That said, I also have a 9x23mm. All the defensive goodness of a .357 Magnum, in a high capacity autoloader. :D The only downside is that only two commercial loadings are offered, both from Winchester. They do 1450 fps or better in a 124 JSP or 125 JHP.

John

JMag
November 18, 2006, 02:18 PM
Yep, but only when contrasted with the 6" .357...unless you plan on carrying it...maybe.

:neener:

Confederate
November 18, 2006, 02:39 PM
The bullet configuration between the two rounds is different and according to Massad Ayoob, the .357 125-gr JHP just sort of brings together all the right things to make it work in kind of like a ballistic perfect storm. And, he adds, it doesn't make much difference who makes it. The .357 doesn't need specialty ammo, because the 125 gr. JHP is at the top of the stopping power range for humans.

The down side of the round is that the bullet itself is rather short, so gases escape prematurely from the cartridge as the bullet leaves the case. The gas flows around the bullet, out the chamber and engulfs the forcing cone, creating a hostile environment for the cone and top strap. With a longer 158 gr. this doesn't happen, and with a 110 gr. it is, of course, aggravated.

The escaping gas creates a huge fireball which in itself might be devastating to close targets. It also creates a blinding blast which may result in the shooter losing his night vision (if shooting at night).

Thus, there is some give and take when using this round and it's probably a good reason not to shoot it a lot out of any gun.

Deer Hunter
November 18, 2006, 02:40 PM
If you want REAL .357 performance out of an autoloader, try the 9x25. It's a necked-down 10mm loading.

Bullet : 125gr. Gold Dot

Ballistics : 1700fps / 803 ft.lbs

And if you REALLY want speed...

Caliber : 9X25

Bullet : 95gr. FMJ

Ballistics : 2000fps / 844 ft. lbs. - 6" BarSto bbl


http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_24

Cousin Mike
November 18, 2006, 02:55 PM
You know, I never found any of those funky 9x__mm loads intriguing.

9x21, 9x23, 9x25, it all sounded kind of... silly to me.

Now I find myself seriously lusting for one of the rarer 9mm guns.

9x25 just sounds pretty damn cool.

MCgunner
November 18, 2006, 05:03 PM
I've never heard of 9x25. That does sound very interesting. :D Alas, I'm sure they only offer conversions for 10s and if you have a 10mm, why would you want to neck it down???? You can shoot heavier bullets in the 10 and it don't sound like the 9x25 is much of an improvement on the 10 ballistically.

It is for that reason I don't think much about the .357 Sig. Anything I could do with the Sig, I can do with the .40! Then there's the .40 Corbon....:rolleyes: I'll keep my .45 a .45, thanks. The one thing I can understand is the point that the necked cases feed more reliably, less dependent on bullet shapes. However, my P90 feeds 100 percent and it's hard to improve on 100 percent.

Deer Hunter
November 18, 2006, 06:04 PM
I believe that the 9x25mm was created by competition shooters to have something with more power and flatter trajectory. I could be wrong, though.

In any case, if you like fast bullets from an automatic, that's about as good as you'll get without going under .30 caliber.

Cousin Mike
November 18, 2006, 07:11 PM
I like the .357SIG. I don't know if I like it more or less than .357 Magnum, I like them both a lot. I do like it better than the .40 S&W - it's easier to control for me - but I have to admit that different loads really blur the line for me in terms of what's "best." I really do think that when it comes to quality JHP's, it's pretty much a matter of preference once you go above 9mm.

.357SIG may not equal what .357 Magnum can achieve, but a 125 grain pill flying at nearly 1400 fps is nothing to sneeze at. When it comes to CCW, I think it becomes splitting hairs somewhat, as almost nobody is CCW'ing 6" barrel revolvers. From a 2" - 4" barrel and factory defense loads, you're looking at almost identical numbers.

I think more people would like the .357SIG if they tried it.

In the meantime, I might start a thread somewhere about all these 9x__mm calibers. :D

Thek9
November 18, 2006, 08:37 PM
Frankly for this guy the difference in grains that matters to me is my go to Sig 229 .40 SAS. Home defense / CCW is Hornady hollow points. I think they are 125's.

My glove box "Big" Dan Wesson .357 Mag 4" Mod. 15 has quality factory rounds in it. How many grains, fps, don't know, don't care. I know when called upon it will "Git R Done".

In my wife's night stand is a Ruger GP100 with 38 specials not 357's. While I'm out of town on assignments my advice to her is when threatened and target acquisition / identification is not possible put a round into the ceiling.I will gladly patch the roof and not care how many grains as long is she's safe and the bad guy knows there is a crazy lady with a gun in my house.

T-Out

115grfmj
November 18, 2006, 10:04 PM
is a 4"er. I launch remington 125gr jsp at 1500fps.....And I have a couple boxs of the Buffalo bore stuff, only it's 180grs at 1450fps:eek: :what: :evil:
I think that pretty well puts the .357Sig to bed.

I agree though that it's the flexibility of the 4" revolvers that takes the cake

Standing Wolf
November 19, 2006, 03:04 AM
I'm holding out for the 9 x 31.283 and a skosh.

Until that guaranteed invasion-stopper hits the streets, I'll stick with the .357 magnum in an honest Colt Python. All this new stuff impresses me as being marketing department wizardry—or wienery, as the case may be.

dogngun
November 19, 2006, 10:56 AM
A good quality 4" .357 Magnum revolver with adjustable sights is about the most versatile handgun made. With the various .38 Spl and .357 Mag loads you can shoot in it, you could use it for anything from small game to deer size and even larger animals as well as self defence and target shooting.
If I had 1 handgun only, that would be my choice.

I have a 4" S&W Model 586.

Mark

JMusic
November 19, 2006, 11:56 AM
My vote also is for the Revolver. I have a 6" Python at my bedside and when on duty I carried a 5" 27. (Probably the best compromise for barrel length).

Jim

MCgunner
November 19, 2006, 01:21 PM
Hmm, how long is the case on the old .351 Winchester auto rifle round? Wonder how much thump that would have out of a pistol?:D

I have a 6" Python

That's not so impressive. John Holmes would have laughed at you....:D

kmrcstintn
November 19, 2006, 02:40 PM
seriously...

there are many good points as to why this is often a handgun of choice and some moot to good points as to why to look elsewhere...here's why it works for me...

1) the .357 magnum revolver is my favorite handgun; Smith & Wesson and Ruger are my chosen tools; S&W Model 19 (4" barrel) is my current with a 6" Ruger GP-100 coming in the next 6 months

2) versatility via example: today, my Model 19 is loaded with Hornady .38 Special hollowpoints for home defense; in @ 1 week, it will be loaded with Magtech .357 Magnum softpoints for deer season as a secondary weapon; I will also carry some .38 Special leadheads in case I have to finish off a wounded animal; this weekend, I will put down some Federal .38 Special +p hollowpoints for accuracy and reliability testing for a new home defense load; I will also put some .38 Special target loads and .357 target loads through it to finish off the shooting session

3) ammo selection and availability: there is always some type of .38 special loads and .357 magnum loads whereever I go to buy ammo; light target loads to very specialized hunting and defensive loads in both calibers that can be shot from the same handgun

4) simplicity in design and use: I don't have to manipulate any type of safety lever or decocker mechanism to get it to work; pick up, aim, place finger on trigger, and shoot...KISS, especially in a panic or hightened awareness situation such as home defense or hunting; BTW: keep the finger off the trigger is the safety and use a double action pull if you want to reduce the chance of an accidental discharge if something suprises you

5) one gun + 2 calibers + multiple uses = a very versatile, useful, and fun platform to use

JMusic
November 19, 2006, 02:48 PM
Mcgunner, note that I didn't give diameter.:D :evil:

Jim

Onmilo
November 19, 2006, 03:00 PM
The 4" .357 isn't overrated.
The 4" .357 revolver is obsolete.
This occurred when the Sig 239?, H&K USP, and Glock 31 were introduced in .357 Sig automatic caliber.

A 6" or longer barrelled .357 is the six shot weapon that allows versatility in the game fields.
The 4' .357 is no longer a reasonable option for serious tactical adventures and the 4" barrelled .357 does not belong in the hunting arena.

1911Tuner
November 19, 2006, 03:04 PM
In three 4-inch Smith & Wesson revolvers, the hot 125-grain hollowpoint ammo averaged a little over 1400 fps for Federal, Winchester and Remington
The Remington comes in a bit hotter than the other two, and the Winchester a bit less so. IIRC, the lowest velocity was about 1380, and the highest was a tick over 1450...but it's been about 15 years since the I took the stats.
In a much used 6-inch 586, the ammo nearly kissed 1500.

The Remington lots averaged higher velocities in a pair of 3-inch Model 13s, coming in at around 1360 fps. Not too shabby.

Now for the interesting part. I have an old lot of 158-grain LSWC ammo that
went a tick over 1300 in two of the 4-inch revolvers, and over 1350 in the 6-inch. Seems that factory .357 ammo has been softened a bit in 50 years...and firing it back to back with modern offerings reflects that. It's noticeably more rambunctious. Could it be that that they discovered what the actual pressures were for the older ammo and got afrighted?

Curious...The claimed 1350 fps for the Sig round. Is that for 115-grain or 124?

JohnBT
November 19, 2006, 03:15 PM
"The 4' .357 is no longer a reasonable option for serious tactical adventures and the 4" barrelled .357 does not belong in the hunting arena."

I'm not tactical. Can I still use a 4" .357 sometimes?

You mean I have to stop hunting little critters with match grade wadcutters in my 4-inch Police Service-Six?

Guess I missed the memos on these finer points of gun ownership.

John

MCgunner
November 19, 2006, 03:22 PM
Yeah, I'm with JohnBT, how about us non-tacticool types who ain't planning an assault on the Taliban? :rolleyes: For self defense, a good man with a revolver, even an SA revolver, is still a dangerous opponent. Don't tell Jerry Miculek he can't use his Smith revolvers anymore because they're too slow or inaccurate or whatever. :rolleyes:

I have killed two deer with a Blackhawk with irons, okay has a 6 1/2" barrel. One of 'em was a tick over 50 yards. I have shot rabbit with a 4" Rossi and taken one Javelina with it. I see the 4" K frame size .357 as one of the most useful outdoor revolvers a guy can have for hiking and such and it's fully capable of hunting deer size game if you restrict your ranges to 50 yards in and you can shoot it.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=32714&d=1134872636

Brian Williams
November 19, 2006, 03:37 PM
Yes, by many Gun Shop Commando, but it does work for what I need.

It will not spin either me or my opponent when I shoot, it does not skin a rabbit or knock anybody down, it will not completely deafen me when I shoot it indoors or blind me when I shoot it after dark, but it does a good job as a hand gun round and a great job as a short range carbine round.

Thek9
November 19, 2006, 05:09 PM
True thrill of thrills, My Coonhounds, Me & my "FOUR" Inch GP100 .357 and a big ol' smelly tusker boar. I don't hunt in a arena I hunt in the woods for sport.

I never got that obsolete memo either. I'll tell you what though my wheelies are sure prurrdy and I'll bet my life on them.

T-

absolute0
November 19, 2006, 06:24 PM
4" .357 magnum over rated?

Are pretty girls, ice cream cones, comfortable shoes or unexpected cash windfalls over rated?

Such a silly question :)

JMusic
November 19, 2006, 07:28 PM
You know Tuner I've noticed the same thing with the older ammo in 357. I still have a box of Super Vels and though I haven't run over a chrony they have a noticeable bigger boom and recoil. The muzzel flash out of the barrel and cylinder gap is larger and brighter too. I heard some of these loads exceeded 1500 fps.

Jim

Greg8098
November 19, 2006, 07:35 PM
Not saying that the 4 inch .357 revolver is obsolete, just trying to compare " factory " magnum loads to " factory " Sig loads. What I meant by overrated is the advertised 1450 fps. not the actual firearm :rolleyes: .

grendelbane
November 19, 2006, 11:00 PM
I think that the 357 SIG may have suffered the same fate as its older brother. I bought a P239 that came with a box of Federal 125 JHP, and it chronographed at 1390 FPS. 2 P229s I got the chance to shoot both broke 1400. These days, I hear the 1350 figure being quoted often.

The 9x23mm Winchester 125 grain Silvertip load will break 1500 FPS from a slightly longer barrel. Still, considering the short barrel, and a short cartridge length that will fit in 9mm frame pistols, the 357 SIG has a very impressive performance.

I had to have a 357 SIG barrel for my Delta Elite. One nice thing is that I can then use just about any 9mm bullet. Those hollow base 115 grain FMJs from Winchester can be made to go extremely fast!:what:

Unfortunately, such high velocities are hard on barrel life, and the bullets themselves do not always perform well at such velocities. Still fun to shoot a couple over the chronograph now and then, and they are surprizingly accurate.

MCgunner
November 20, 2006, 09:35 AM
Not saying that the 4 inch .357 revolver is obsolete, just trying to compare " factory " magnum loads to " factory " Sig loads. What I meant by overrated is the advertised 1450 fps. not the actual firearm

And, my opinion is, there's more to the .357 Magnum than a 125 grain bullet at 1450 or whatever advertized factory velocity, but that's ALL there is to the .357 sig. You can't get a buffalo bore 180 grain load in .357 Sig OR hand load an equivalent and you CAN match its capabilities with its parent cartridge, the .40 S&W. I don't really see the point of the .357 Sig, but I do see the point and own .357 magnum revolvers. The Sig round is a marketing ploy to law enforcement, an answer to a question few people asked. The .40 S&W is fully capable of over 500 FPE, equaling the .357 Sig and with a bigger bullet. It does it with more bullet weight as a lower velocity, but ft lbs is ft lbs.

Either load is a great self defense round. If that's what you have, shoot it and like it. I got no screaming desire for a .357 Sig, though. My .38 and 9x19 pocket guns serve me in the CCW roll and if I fell I need to carry more, I have a .45ACP that I trust will do the job. I do have a need for a .357 magnum revolver. Anyone who enjoys the outdoors and wants an outdoor gun will be well served with a .357 magnum revolver.

So, if anything, I think the .357 Sig is over-rated. It can't do anything its parent cartridge, the .40 S&W can't do and with a bigger bullet. All in all, I'd as soon have a 9x19 for the more compact, controllable weapon for CCW. The .357 magnum is simply too useful NOT to own.

1911Tuner
November 20, 2006, 09:43 AM
MCGunner...Hear hear! If I were limited to one handgun, and it had to be a revolver...the.357 Magnum would be it, hands-down, and if I had to choose a barrel length, it would be 4 inches.

Ahhh! The verstatile .357 Magnum. Git some!:cool:

Onmilo
November 20, 2006, 10:14 AM
I knew my comment was going to begin a flurry of comments praising the 4" .357 magnum and whatever load somebody chooses to load into it.

I stick by my assessment though.
If you wished to be handicapped by your choice of a short barrel magnum that will not attain the true capabilities of the cartridge, and I don't care what the ammunition manufacturer states about the capabilities of his brand of magnums, that is by nature and by God your choice.
I once used to think the .30/06 was the be all to do all rifle caliber until I shot .300 Winchester and .375 H&H magnums.
Heck, Browning wants us all to believe the Winchester short Magnums and super short magnums are so wonderful that they chrome line the barrels to prove that the cartridges don't eat barrels like so many "Internet experts" claim that they do.
These cartridge foibles, and the money wasted on them, are one of the reasons FN pulled the plug on a great old American Company I am sure.
Pisspoor R&D.
We "internet experts" are the ones who spend our own hard earned money shooting these things and learning the truths that no one wants to accept.
It sucks when you have hard earned capital invested in a project that ends up coming up way short of the claims.
True for the Company and even more so for the consumer.
My first Magnum revolver was a 4" Model 28 that I shot more way more than 10,000 rounds through and most all of them were magnum level loads loaded in Magnum cases.
I know the guns and I know the cartridge extremely well and can tell you 140 grain jacketed bullets loaded warmer than the manuals say they should be will group at Match grade accuracy and won't eat the barrel throat like 125s.
170 grain jacketed bullets out of a six inch barrel will kill any game animal walking in North America and do it at 125 meters or better in truely skilled hands.
This is something the 4" gun just will not do as you cannot get the velocity to a level that you can with the six inch gun unless you take the chamber pressure to a level I consider dangerous.
As for me,
If I was limited to just one handgun and it was to be a revolver I would choose a five inch, or better yet, six inch .44 Magnum.

1911Tuner
November 20, 2006, 10:35 AM
Onmilo makes good points...but it's not only/always about the game field or hunting. Sometimes portability and handiness enters the picture. The 4-inch revolver is a compromise. The 6-inch revolver is also a compromise. It depends on the intended use of gun and cartridge as to which you choose.
Hell...If you want all that the round is capable of for sporting use, use a 16-inch carbine. If you need more punch than the cartridge will deliver, step up to a .41 or .44 Magnum. The .357's versatility is what keeps it going, and the 4-inch revolver is the best compromise for yeoman service, rather than a specialized niche.

Finally...Power...energy...velocity...are all pretty much useless unless the bullet is placed well. If a 158-grain bullet at 1300 fps will do, the same bullet at 1200 would likely do just as well.

MCgunner
November 20, 2006, 10:43 AM
If I was limited to just one handgun and it was to be a revolver I would choose a five inch, or better yet, six inch .44 Magnum.

And give up all hope of carrying a handgun concealed for self defense. You can carry a K frame 4" IWB. There are better choices IMHO, but it can be done, I've done it.

If you're shooting brown bear or whatever at 125 yards, you need a rifle. .30-06? Nah, I prefer a .308. I don't need no stinkin' magnum. I have a 7mm Rem Mag that I never use anymore. Too much of everything for what I do. If I lived in Alaska I might use it and I'd probably own a .375, but what is there in Texas I need a belted magnum for? :rolleyes:

I do quite a bit of handgun hunting. My specialized handgun for hunting is a 12" .30-30 with a 2x scope. I don't need no stinkin' .44 mag. ROFL!

Cousin Mike
November 20, 2006, 05:02 PM
And, my opinion is, there's more to the .357 Magnum than a 125 grain bullet at 1450 or whatever advertized factory velocity, but that's ALL there is to the .357 sig.

Well, at least you give the Sig round it's credit for being a good SD round... A very well-known member here once told me that the .357SIG was worthless for self defense... That person shall remain nameless. :D

I don't really see the point of the .357 Sig

12 rounds per reload of 125 grain .357" @ 1400 fps - available in a carry package - you don't see the point in that?

I know a lot of folks don't desire a .357 Sig - just like a lot of folks don't like or want a .40 S&W - but to say that there's no point to it seems reaching a little IMHO. I don't think it would have the success it does on the market if there were no reason for it. The .40 is bigger. The .357 moves faster. You make the same compromise (size vs. speed) when you choose any pistol round.

The one thing I hear time and time again in reference to the .357Sig vs. .40S&W debate is that the Sig round supposedly does better through glass and other barriers, and I've seen video that clearly shows a .357Sig round plowing through glass and plywood, and still getting a good 14"+ penetration in ballistic gel - with 3 layers of denim stacked on top for good measure.

The .357 Sig is not a hunting round. It's not supposed to be. So of course it's not as versatile as the .357 Magnum can be.

All I know is that if it weighs the same, is the same size, and flies at the same speed, it's going to produce very similar results. So it seems to me that is in and of itself the very reason for the 125 grain .357 Sig round. Having said that, I'm off to chase some figures on the Sig round, and maybe I'll get lucky and find some numbers for the 158 grain Sig round as well. I'll see if I can find that video (of the Sig round vs. glass, plywood, denim & gel) for you guys.

Cousin Mike
November 20, 2006, 07:42 PM
I looked all this stuff up, just for you guys. Personally I resent having to do homework to prove my point (lol... :p ) but hell, who am I kidding? I didn't have anything else better to do, and I figured maybe if I go ahead and get all this stuff down, I'll have a nice little file saved for whenever I see the .357 Sig vs. [insert caliber here] threads.

Corbon Pow’R Ball:

357 MAG – 100 grain @ 1625 FPS / 586 FT. LBS (Barrel length of 4.6”)

357 SIG - 100 grain @ 1600 FPS / 568 FT. LBS (Barrel length of 4.0”)

And for good measure, since the .40 S&W was brought up in comparison:

40 S&W - 135 grain @ 1325 FPS / 526 FTLBS (Barrel length of 4.0”)


Corbon Traditional JHP:

357 MAG - 110 GR. JHP @ 1500FPS / 555FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG - 125 GR. JHP @ 1400FPS / 544FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG - 140 GR. JHP @ 1300FPS / 525FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)


357 SIG - 115 GR. JHP @ 1500FPS / 575FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 SIG - 125 GR. JHP @ 1425FPS / 564FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)


Corbon DPX:

357 MAG - 125 GR. DPX @ 1300 FPS / 469 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

357 SIG - 125 GR. DPX @ 1250 FPS / 382 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)


Remington:

357 MAG – 125GR (Golden Saber, JHP) @ 1220 FPS / 413 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG – 125GR (UMC, JSP) @ 1450 FPS / 583 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG – 125GR (Express, SJHP) @ 1450 FPS / 583 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

357 SIG – 125GR (Express JHP) @ 1350 FPS / 506 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 SIG – 125GR (UMC JHP) @ 1350 FPS / 506 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

Winchester:

357 MAG - 125 gr. Super-X JHP @ 1450 FPS / 583 FT. LBS (no barrel length given)
357 MAG - 110 gr. USA JHP @ 1295 FPS / 410 FT. LBS (no barrel length given)
357 MAG - 145 gr. Silvertip JHP @ 1290 FPS / 535 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG - 125 gr. WinClean JSP @ 1370 FPS / 521 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)


357 SIG - 125 gr. USA JHP - @ 1350 FPS / 506 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 SIG – 125 gr. Ranger-T JHP @ 1350 FPS / 506 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 SIG – 100 gr. Ranger Frangible @ 1490 FPS / 493 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 SIG – 125 gr. WinClean Flat-nose @ 1350 FPS / 506 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

Speer (Gold Dot):

357 SIG – 125 GR. GDHP @ 1375 FPS / 525 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

357 MAG – 125 GR. GDHP @ 1450 FPS / 584 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG – 158 GR. GDHP @ 1235 FPS / 535 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 MAG – 170 GR. GDHP @ 1180 / 526 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

Hornady:

357 SIG – 124 GR. XTP/JHP @ 1350 FPS / 502 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)
357 SIG – 147 GR. XTP/JHP @ 1225 FPS / 490 FT. LBS (4.0” barrel)

357 MAG – 125 GR. XTP/HP @ 1500 FPS / 624 FT. LBS (8.0” barrel)
357 MAG – 140 GR. XTP/HP @ 1350 FPS / 566 FT. LBS (8.0” barrel)
357 MAG – 158 GR. XTP/HP @ 1250 FPS / 548 FT. LBS (8.0” barrel)

Notice the huge difference in barrel lengths.

That’s about all I was willing to look up at the moment, but I’ve learned a little bit looking all this stuff up… What I’ve learned is that there really doesn’t seem to be a huge difference between the 2 loads in any SD/carry application you’re likely to be carrying. That, and .357 Sig doesn’t get the respect it would seem it deserves. :D

1911Tuner
November 20, 2006, 08:14 PM
Probably a lot like the comparison between the .30-06 Springfield and the .308 Winchester rounds. In the "standard" bullet weight range, the difference is pretty negligible. (150 and 165) The old '06 comes into its own with bullets of 180 grains and over.

Greg8098
November 20, 2006, 10:04 PM
I know that the 357 sig is nowhere as versatile as the .357 magnum :banghead: , only a total noob would think that :rolleyes: . I just remember hearing that the magnum round chronoed from a 4 inch tube would yield less than 1450, more around 1350 - 1375. I also know that this is not the magnum's full potential, heck you can overpressure anything to it's full potential :neener: . I just needed to know if anybody ever chronographed 357 magnum rounds from a 4 inch revolver. I am talking about the ammo that the average Joe could go to the local Wal-Mart and get, not the handloads and hunting loads :banghead: !!!

Greg8098
November 20, 2006, 10:08 PM
Also when the 10mm was reduced in length, I wish the 357 sig would have been the original design instead of the .40 inch compromise :barf: !!!

357wheelgunner
November 20, 2006, 10:36 PM
Velocity and bullet weight are one thing, but you guys are missing an important advantage of the revolver: You can have any PROFILE bullet you want. That means that those old magical federal 125gr. JHPs that gave the .357 its name, with their wide evil looking hollow point, don't have to worry about feeding issues as you slide them into empty cylinders. You can't get just any profile bullet to feed into a semi auto, but the wheelgun works all 6 times with whatever ammo you put in, be it .38 spl lead round nose, the venerable "FBI load" 158 gr. LHP+P .38, a .357 125gr JHP, or a buffalo boar critter stopper.

Cousin Mike
November 21, 2006, 02:10 PM
Velocity and bullet weight are one thing, but you guys are missing an important advantage of the revolver: You can have any PROFILE bullet you want. That means that those old magical federal 125gr. JHPs that gave the .357 its name, with their wide evil looking hollow point, don't have to worry about feeding issues as you slide them into empty cylinders.

Not trying to be funny, but I'm thinking apples and oranges here. You are right though, the one thing I never thought of when selecting a weapon for concealed carry or home defense was bullet profile.

On the other hand, feeding issues: Have you ever seen a .357Sig round, or a pistol chambered in .357 Sig? There ARE NO feeding issues.. It's a 9mm bullet being pushed into a 10mm chamber. My .357 Sig is the only pistol I have where you can slowly and gently ride the slide forward, and the round will still chamber just as smoothly as ever.

Before looking up that info, I was ready to concede that the Sig round couldn't touch the Magnum round... Now I'm not so sure. From what I'm seeing, in the classic 125gr. load or any loads of similar weight - the difference in performance is minimal at best. All things being equal, it seems to depend on who's loading the ammunition. Notice above:

Corbon DPX, .357 Magnum smoked the .357 Sig.

But if you look at the figures for the Corbon Traditional JHP, the Sig round smoked the Magnum round, averaging about 570 to the Magnums 540 or so FPE. Most others stayed close to even... at around 500 FPE - while the Magnum load can vary from barely 400 to over 600 FPE depending on make, model, and barrel length. The only round that broke 600 FPE was the .357 Magnum from an 8" barrel. From a 4" barrel, those numbers would be just like the rest.. too close to see any real difference.

I think 1911Tuner said it best... In the common weights, it seems the difference is pretty negligable. In the heavier hunting loads, the .357 comes into it's own.

For 2-legged animals, either one works just fine.

If only I could find that damn video... :banghead:

GunNut
November 21, 2006, 03:05 PM
Results are what counts and the .357mag has a long history of being a great fight stopper.

IMHO, the .357sig will have to prove it's self for many years to take the title away from the .357mag.

Steve

Cousin Mike
November 21, 2006, 03:43 PM
To be honest, I hope the .357Sig never does take the title away... I like carrying the underdog round... And I like to carry the champion as well. :D

I'd just be happy if people recognized the Sig round for what it is.

.357 in an autoloader... that's all it is, that's all it's supposed to be.

Otherguy Overby
November 21, 2006, 04:20 PM
How about a bottom feeder with 18 or 19 rounds of 9mm 125 grain soft points at 1450+ fps? It was originally somewhat of a wildcat using .223 brass trimmed to 23 mm and a 9mm bullet inserted. It runs at rifle pressures.

The only real drawback is it's really LOUD. How can you shoot it with your index fingers in your ears? It's like a short barreled AR for LOUD. Wanna load one up more? Clark has... :)

The biggest problem with my 1911 9x23 is getting it back from anyone who's had a chance to shoot it.

Regardless, the .357 really is more versatile cartridge.

miko
November 21, 2006, 04:38 PM
First, 100 fps is a marginal difference.

15% more energy to be precise. Quite a margin.
A realistic 1500 fps (150 fps difference) gives you an edge in energy of 25%.

miko

1911Tuner
November 21, 2006, 05:02 PM
All this talk of X% more energy and Xfps more speed. Much ado about nothing, especially when discussing handgun velocity and energy levels. Bullet placement is the key. Velocity serves mainly to flatten trajectory. Even in rifles, if you need more power, what you likely need is more bullet, impact energy notwithstanding...and even at that, placement is the key. If you can't down an elk with an '06, you probably can't do it with a .338 magnum either.

krept
November 21, 2006, 05:09 PM
Going on what was touched on above, my understanding is that the lethality of the vaunted 125gr .357 Magnums revolved around their rapid energy dump to the point of fragmentation.

The 357SIG, on the other hand, was designed more for controlled expansion and penetration... especially as evident in the bullets where the jacket is bonded to the core like the Gold Dot.

So while the numbers on paper appear similar... and the weights should dictate a very close sectional density for each, this is a case where bullet construction should be looked at very closely.

MCgunner
November 21, 2006, 06:36 PM
Probably a lot like the comparison between the .30-06 Springfield and the .308 Winchester rounds. In the "standard" bullet weight range, the difference is pretty negligible. (150 and 165) The old '06 comes into its own with bullets of 180 grains and over.

Oh, boy, another caliber war within a caliber war... :D Awe, I won't jack the thread for this one...:D

1911Tuner
November 21, 2006, 06:59 PM
MCGunner quipped:

>Oh, boy, another caliber war within a caliber war... Awe, I won't jack the thread for this one...<
*****************

Aw, hell...why not? Let's have us a flamefest over the .30-30 and the old .32 Winchester Special too, while we're at it.:D

I like the .32 Special...:neener:

1911HOP
November 21, 2006, 07:39 PM
if you got 2 arms & 2 legs carry them both they are both nice and work that way you dont have to take 2 asprins thinking about it just my 2 cents

miko
November 21, 2006, 08:34 PM
When .357 Sig becomes cheap and plentiful, I will consider buying a 357Sig barrel for my HK P2000 .40
If anything, I could reload using 9mm bullets and two dies instead of three...

But I will keep my 4 357 Mag. revolvers as well.

miko

MCgunner
November 22, 2006, 11:45 AM
Aw, hell...why not? Let's have us a flamefest over the .30-30 and the old .32 Winchester Special too, while we're at it.

I like the .32 Special...


ROFL.... Well, I agree about the .30-06/.308 thing of course. Any handloader can agree on that one, just that controlled expansion bullets like the Barnes X have somewhat elevated the .308 in the game you can pursue with it. I like short action rifles and there ain't nothin' I'll ever hunt I can't do with the .308 (or .30-06).

Now, the .32 special only exists as a way to bring your .30-30 back to life when you've shot out the barrel. :neener:

Bwaaaaa, ha, ha!

_______________________________________________

Now, back to the regular subject matter.......:rolleyes:

1911Tuner
November 22, 2006, 11:59 AM
MCGunner said:

>Now, the .32 special only exists as a way to bring your .30-30 back to life when you've shot out the barrel.<
*********************

Not if'n ya shoot cast bullets in'em. 170s with a gas check at 2,000+ fps shoot as good or better than jacketed bullets...They're cheaper...and don't hurt the bores NONE.:cool:

They do a pretty conclusive number on Bambi too...;)

Brian Williams
November 22, 2006, 12:57 PM
So is a 38-55 for when you have shot out the rebored 30-30 in 32 spec????
:D

The problem with 357sig is the bottleneck would cause setback and tie up even a good revolver, so I am all for a 357mag 4"...
Besides a bottle neck case would look weird with a 158 LSWC in it.

lawboy
November 22, 2006, 02:10 PM
The 4-inch 357 magnum is not over rated.
It has served more people in more capacities better than any other handgun platform I am aware of.
Law enforcement weapon.
Civilian weapon.
Hunting arm.
Home Defense weapon.
Target arm.
Plinking arm.
The power range of ammo it can use is HUGE.
Small woman hand shoot it. Large man can shoot it.
With grip changes, and proper selection of gun size (J, K, L, etc.),
small hand can handle it,
Large hand can handle it.
Sight options are legion.

When you consider all the ways that the 4-inch 357 makes a competent, main-caliber handgun accessible and usable to a huge cross section of people, it really is not possible to over estimate its value.

Regards to all.

1911Tuner
November 22, 2006, 02:19 PM
Lawboy...Agreed. For a go anywhere/do anything general purpose sidearm, the mid-sized 4-inch .357 is tough to beat.

brownie0486
November 22, 2006, 02:41 PM
If I were limited to one handgun, and it had to be a revolver...the.357 Magnum would be it, hands-down, and if I had to choose a barrel length, it would be 4 inches.

Same here sir. I'll never give up or trade my 4 inch 357 revos.

Brownie

1911Tuner
November 22, 2006, 02:51 PM
And I'm real partial to K-frame Smiths...fixed sights please...but the more I mess with the L-frames, the better I like.

'Course, I'm right fond of the M-58 too. A little big and heavy for concealed carry, but just right in good strong-side leather or a shoulder rig out in the boonies.:cool:

brownie0486
November 22, 2006, 02:57 PM
1911Tuner;

My K frame 65 is just the "perfect" 357 for me with the standard magna grips. It often goes afield with me on search and rescue ops in the Superstition Mtns here in Az. No adjustable sights to worry about bangin around, bull barrelled and as rugged as the mountains I travel in search of people needing help.

I should have never sold my model 13's which I had bought for the princely sum of 125.00 each back in the day.:banghead:

I'm fond of my N frame model 28 357 as well.:D

Brownie

kmrcstintn
November 23, 2006, 02:10 PM
YIKES!!!

Guess I'm really outdated, outmoded, and one slow SOB...

Not only do I have a S&W 19 4" wheelie, my CCW and backup housegun is a mesely S&W 642 snubby. My next considerations involve a Ruger GP-100 6" wheelie and an Armscor M200 4" wheelie chambered in .38 special that is a licensed copy of older Colt revolvers made on Colt machinery in the Phillipines! :what: :eek: :D :cool: ;) :)

The only semiauto I have, a Beretta 9000S in 9mm is a nice piece and fun to shoot, but I am still more accurate and get more 'kill zone" hits with my wheelies...:scrutiny:

Up until 2005, the Pennsylvania Game Commision duty weapons were 6 shot S&W 686 4" barrel revolvers for their payed officers and the voluntary deputies were authorized to carry any 4" barrel revolvers in .357 magnum; last year they just made the switch to Glock sidearms in .357 Sig chambering and I' not sure if the entire force has made the transition yet...:confused:

Hook686
November 24, 2006, 05:02 PM
November 20th, 2006 03:42 PM


Cousin Mike

I looked all this stuff up, just for you guys. Personally I resent having to do homework to prove my point (lol... ) but hell, who am I kidding? I didn't have anything else better to do, and I figured maybe if I go ahead and get all this stuff down, I'll have a nice little file saved for whenever I see the .357 Sig vs. [insert caliber here] threads.

...


That’s about all I was willing to look up at the moment, but I’ve learned a little bit looking all this stuff up… What I’ve learned is that there really doesn’t seem to be a huge difference between the 2 loads in any SD/carry application you’re likely to be carrying. That, and .357 Sig doesn’t get the respect it would seem it deserves.


Yup limiting your search sure supports your position. You over looked Buffalo Bore ammunition. The 125 grain JHC has 1700 fps, giving 802 ft-lbs in a 6" revolver, and about 750 ft-lbs, at 1603 fps, in the 4" barreled revolver.

http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#357

Personally I think, that the difference between 1600-1700 fps compared, with 1200-1400 fps 125 grain rounds you listed, to be pretty significant.

I agree that the standard service calibers, 9mm, .357 Sig, .40 S&W, and .45 acp, are pretty much equal, from a terminal balistics stand point (see: http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000581#000002 )


However I do not think that equality extends to the .357 magnum, .41 magnum, or .44 magnum.

Cousin Mike
November 24, 2006, 10:50 PM
Yup limiting your search sure supports your position.

LOL... Sweet. Like I just did that on purpose to make the .357 Magnum look inferior to the .357 Sig. ;) You caught me, I give up. :rolleyes: The reason I left Buffalo Bore ammunition out of my search is because it had already been covered earlier in the thread. So was Doubletap ammunition, which also smokes the Sig round. Or did you not read the whole thread before you jumped on me?

Also, you're citing one of the hottest loads available like it's an average.

I left a lot of different brands of ammo out - I put 2 hours of my life into answering a question because I was happy to do it - not because I'm obligated to. If you want to look up the figures from more ammo companies, I'd love to see them. The numbers I posted are available for you to look up as well. I did a quick search of some common carry ammo. Whats up with accusing me of doctoring the results? :D Kinda silly, don't you think?

Like I said, I own guns chambered in both calibers. I like both rounds - I prefer the Magnum at the range, and for everything else... but for the guns I have, at the moment, I prefer the Sig round for carry.

I just think it's funny how people will do or say anything and everything to take away from the performance of the .357 Sig. Including downplay it's average numbers, and compare that BS average (quite a few of those Sig rounds broke 1500 fps, and one broke 1600) to the hottest .357 Magnum load there is, and then say.

".357Sig can't come close."

I never said .357Sig was better. We all know that .357 Magnum can do things the Sig round can't, and I've acknowledged that. People asked for figures, and I looked them up. I was a little surprised by the information I found. No one else seemed bothered by it. What's up, you got stock in .357 Magnum or somethin'? :cool:

jonsidneyb
November 25, 2006, 09:01 PM
I am kind of perplexed at all of this.

It might just be me but I see advantages to the Revolver and I see advantages to the Automatic.

The revolver can truely do somethings better than the automatic and the automatic can truely do somethings better than the revolver.

I guess the question is is it overrated but that is not how much of the discussion goes.

If you mean are some ballistics tables rating the load a bit faster than it it in many guns for factory ammo. That seems possible or it could be the variance between gun. If that is what is meant...perhaps possible.

I myself do not think the .357 magnum is overrated as for usefulness. In what I think are usable sized guns I think it does all that can be expected of a cartridge in this class and is very versitile. I almost think this is a Auto VS Revolver discussion.

I kind both the Auto and Revolver have a place in this world. I think it is silly when people say one or the other is not good. They both are good, they just have different stengths and weaknesses.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is the 4 inch 357 Magnum overrated???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!