.357 SIG vs. 40 cal


PDA






giles
December 24, 2003, 02:37 PM
Can anyone offer some advise as to whether .357 SIG ammo is preferable to 40cal? I am thinking of buying a SIG compact classic and am not sure whether to go for the 357 barrel. Also, any problems with availability of the 357? I shot a 40 cal in a Kahr K9 and found that the recoil was more severe than a 45. Any help will be appreciated.

If you enjoyed reading about ".357 SIG vs. 40 cal" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
cslinger
December 24, 2003, 02:47 PM
Ok here is my un-educated 2 cents.

.40 S&W is generally far more available then .357SIG and is usually cheaper by an amount similar to .40 vs. .45.

.357SIG is a very very very hot 9mm for lack of a better term. Now because of this you can find some 9mm +P+ that basically performs like some of the .357SIG offerings. The best .357SIG will perform better than a hot 9mm though, IMO.

.357SIG is loud, has lots of flash and a snappier more upward kick then .40. This is of course in my opinion since recoil is very subjective. It is by no means harsh through a SIG P239, just snappier.

.357SIG has been known to batter even the best guns and puts more wear and tear.

I would THINK .357SIG would be a better barrier penetrator then .40 but I worry, probably needlessly so, that .357SIG may over penetrate in situations that you may not want it to. I have heard this really comes down to the design of the hollow point and some have great reputations and some don't.

If I were you I would get the gun in .40 and convert to .357 at your leisure. I personally love .357SIG for fun but carry 165 grain .40 caliber ammunition when I carry my P239. I am sort of a bigger hole is better kind of guy. Not that I want to start any caliber wars as I frequently carry 9mm, .357 Magnum, .40, .45 and I believe that with proper ammunition all are more than adequate in the self defense role. I am just saying that I feel better with bigger bullets making bigger holes as a psychological thing for me, hence my most carried SD gun is a SIG P245 in .45 ACP.

So in short for me, .357SIG is fun but I prefer .40 for real work.

10-Ring
December 24, 2003, 03:02 PM
In a practical sense, I'd go w/ the the 40 but, I much prefer shooting the 357sig more. Since I already have my defensive guns covered, I'd go w/ the 357sig for the fun factor :D ...but that's just me!

Beav
December 24, 2003, 03:10 PM
You really need to go out and shoot both. The biggest difference IMO is shooting the two rounds. The 357SIG has a lot of bark and flash which translates to FUN for a lot of shooters. For others it may be too much.
You really can't go wrong with one or the other since all you need is a barrel to convert between rounds. If it was me I would start with a 40S&W even though I have more fun shooting 357SIG.

jc2
December 24, 2003, 04:00 PM
.357SIG is loud, has lots of flash and a snappier more upward kick then .40.
The 357SIG has a lot of bark and flash
.357SIG has been known to batter even the best guns and puts more wear and tear.
NOT good qualities in a defensive weapon!

Logically, the better comparison would be 9x19 versus .40 S&W. The 9x19 is consistently delivers the same performance (terminal effectiveness) both in the lab and in actual LE usage as the 357 SIG--and without the negatives associated with the 357 SIG plus an increased capacity. Your looking at about 16 inches of penetration and expansion to approximately .63 calibre with both the 9x19 and 357 SIG. The .40 S&W will deliver about the same penetration and approximately .05 inches more expansion (.68 calibre). As you increase bullet size and mass from 9x19/357 SIG, to .40 S&W more tissue is crushed, resulting in a larger permanent cavity. In addition, the larger bullets often offer better performance through intermediate barriers.

Gary G23
December 24, 2003, 04:53 PM
If you are buying it for defensive purposes and ever have to use it for such you will be glad you got the 357. Just my opinion.

Mannlicher
December 24, 2003, 05:23 PM
Different aspects of a given cartridge are important to different people. Some go for the most effective cartridge, regardless of whether it 'kicks' or is loud.
You probably will only get one chance to save your butt when the chips are down. The choice is yours as to whether or not you want, for that instance, the best, or will you settle for something that was more friendly when you were just popping caps at paper.

Personally, I like a .45 more than either of the choices here. If I were to choose between .40S&W and the .357 Sig, I would carry the sig.

M58
December 24, 2003, 09:47 PM
Better to have a 10mm and load up or down as needed.

Brasso
December 24, 2003, 11:34 PM
.357sig or .40??? Which do you want to do? Make a bigger hole or brag about untested, unquantified, and marginal (at best) increases in kinetic energy? I'd personally go with a 9mm before the .357sig.

N3rday
December 25, 2003, 12:35 AM
Wow, there are some real .357 sig haters...
I spent a lot of time at Sigforum.com so I have heard a lot of fans of the cartridge...some extra punch to that 9mm never hurt anyone:D
I'm sure balistically .40 is a better manstopper, but .357 owns 9mm in stopping power for sure.

mrapathy2000
December 25, 2003, 02:35 AM
357sig will go through an intended target better than 9mm as well. over penetration. it is possible to go with a pistol in 40S&W and convert to 357sig. if your looking at data corbon 135gr 40S&W will do 1300fps 500ft lbs energy which is comparable to 357sig and 357magnum though a slightly bigger hole. couple other good rounds in 40S&W are remington express 155gr and winchester silvertips think speer gold dots will do 1200fps and 480-500ft lbs energy.

9mm would be a better choice in compact defense pistol easier followup shots.
though 40S&W with federal hydrashock 135gr doing 1190 and 420 ft lbs energy a light load and feals like firing 9mm recoil wise probably the most pleasant round to shoot in 40S&W.

40S&W can be light,fast with high energy or heavy,slow and low energy. it also comes to a middle performance. want more go with 10mm. wish they would of made brass bit thicker in 40S&W when they shrunk the cartridge from 10mm.

357sig is not cheap nor widely availible expect to buy in bulk period otherwise you pay out the nose. reloading would be good idea to keep cost down.

+p+ 9mm does pretty much what 357sig can do though 357sig is bit safer as it stays within design spec pressure.

overall 40S&W and 357sig will ware a pistol out faster. springs and other parts which could need servicing should be watched and maintained.

clubsoda22
December 25, 2003, 03:21 AM
but .357 owns 9mm in stopping power for sure.

See: Winchester Ranger Talon 127gr 9mm+P+ and guess again. Marginally better at best. It was a cool idea, but in tests it shows that despite the almost 200fps increase over 9mm, penetration and expansion was identical, that is, if the bullet didn't frag, which was a problem with the higher velocities. Why deal with the increased recoil, noise, wear and flash if terminal ballistics are pretty much identical?

jc2
December 25, 2003, 10:22 AM
but .357 owns 9mm in stopping power for sure.
Not hardly. The 124-grain +P Gold Dot delivers the same terminal performance as the 125-grain 357 SIG Gold Dot. The Winchester RA9T and RA9TA do as well. The best that can be said of the 357 SIG is that it equals the 9mm in terminal performance, although at the price of less ammunition capacity along with greater recoil, muzzle flash and wear on the weapon. Both the .40 S&W and .45 ACP make larger holes in the target and therefore have the potential to more rapidly incapacitate an aggressive adversary in a lethal force encounter.

Just stating the facts--not "hating" the 357 SIG. It's a fun little round to play with--lots of flash and noise and does attract attention, but when it comes to personal defence, the 357 SIG is not a great or lousy cartridge, just another choice.

There are a whole lot better places to get data on handgun ammuniton performance than sigforum.com including firearmstactical.com, tacticalforums.com and ammolab.com (and forum)--they tend to be a whole lot less "faith-based" (more reason-based) than sigforum.

Ky Larry
December 25, 2003, 03:26 PM
What do you want the pistol for? CCW? HD? Plinking? How much experience do you have shooting center fire hand guns? What is you personal feelings adout recoil? What is your budget for ammo? Without more info, I wouldn't hazard any advise. CSLINGER makes a lot of sense.
Whatever you decide, good luck.

jnb01
December 27, 2003, 12:57 AM
In .40 S&W, one can select effective bullet weights in 155, 165, and 180gr weights. IMO, this is already an advantage, as variety is a good thing!

As far as the 357 Sig "besting" the .40 in terms of hard barrier penetration, here is some data directly from Winchester's 2002 online LE catalog for their Ranger ammunition.

{Steel}

125gr RA357SIGT....Pen: 23.4 inches/ Exp: .41/ Ret. Weight: 125grs.

180gr RA40T......Pen: 17"/ Exp: .52/ RW: 178grs.

165gr RA40TA....Pen: 20.4"/ Exp: .48/ RW: 165grs.

{Autoglass}

125gr RA357SIGT....Pen: 10.3"/ Exp: .49/ RW: 81grs.

180gr RA40T......Pen: 12"/ Exp: .61/ RW: 153grs.

165gr RA40TA....Pen: 11.3"/ Exp: .61/ RW: 139grs.

I personally consider performance with regards to service caliber handgun projectiles, to be measured in terms of penetration and expansion. Here is some other various data comparing the two calibers using Ranger and Federal Tactical bullets, which overall, are widely considered the best two designs available. The test's are courtesy of Doc Roberts over on Tactical Forums, and David Difabio of ammolab. All results were obtained using 4-layers of 14.oz denim, and are from pistols with barrel lengths between 4 and 4.5 inches.

Federal Tactical 125gr 357 Sig: Vel= 1390fps/ Pen= 13.5"/ Exp= .62

Federal Tactical 180gr .40SW: Vel= 1000fps/ Pen= 12.4"/ Exp= .73

Federal Tactical 165gr .40SW: Vel= 1013fps/ Pen= 12.9"/ Exp= .65


Ranger 125gr RA357T: Vel= 1340fps/ Pen= 13.5"/ Exp= .63

Ranger 180gr RA40T: Vel= 910fps/ Pen= 14.2"/ Exp= .65

Ranger 165gr RA40TA: Vel= 1166fps/ Pen= 13.5"/ Exp= .66

For the sake of comparison, here is the data for the 127gr +P+ RA9TA through 4-layers of 14.oz denim, fired from a G19. Test is courtesy of ammolab.

Ranger 127gr +P+ RA9TA: Vel= 1219fps/ Pen= 14.8"/ Exp= .63


Additionally, if one wanted "357 Sig like" performance from the .40SW, the new 135gr .40SW Corbon PowR'ball loading is fairly similar. The downside, is that it does not do well in barrier testing eg: autoglass and steel, so it would not make for an effective LE loading. However, in the 4-layer denim test, it has indeed performed well.

135gr Corbon PRB, from a Glock 22, through 4-layers of 14oz. denim. Reference source is ammolab. (Vel= 1311fps/ Pen= 14.1"/ Exp= .64).......

As shown, the .40SW can and does outperform the 357 Sig in barrier penetration tests and the 4-layer denim test, when using the better loads for each. While the 9mm and 357 Sig are on par with each other when utilizing the better loads for each.

IMO, one of the main reasons the 357 Sig has enjoyed some level of success, is that it is compatible with the .40SW. While it has garnered attention from some of in LE circles, it seems less civilian shooters are enamored with it. As was previously noted, Ruger, S&W, and Walther, do not even chamber guns for it. Additionally, HK never released a full-size USP chambered for it, and it has been said they will discontinue the compact version do to poor sales.

I like shooting the 357 Sig at the range, and it has proven itself quite effective in LE field use. However, it is my opinion that it offers nothing significant over any of the other available service calibers, and actually a bit less in some cases.

Best, jnb01

Poohgyrr
December 27, 2003, 02:01 AM
FWIW, I'd try to shoot both calibers in different pistols and see how I did with them. Recoil can be personal, and I know it's easier for me to do my best with some loads/pistols than with others.

fastbolt
December 27, 2003, 03:19 AM
If you want a "hot" 9mm, buy a 9mm ...

If you want a .40 S&W, buy one ...

If you want to shoot "lightweight bullets", buy a 9mm ...

If you want to shoot "heavier bullets", buy a .40 S&W ...

If you want a "fun range gun", buy whatever fits that description for YOU ...

If it's a "defensive weapon", then the slight "performance" differences among the major calibers are probably more noticeable when it comes to "debating" them, then when actually comparing their real-world effects ... ;) . These are just defensive/service HANDGUN calibers, you know.

There ARE some subjective handling and recoil management considerations when comparing them, though ...

Have fun ... :)

Bobarino
December 27, 2003, 04:49 PM
the solution to your dilema is simple really, buy the .40, and also buy a spare .357Sig barrel. or vice versa. its a simple barrel swap to convert between calibers. perhaps a recoil spring too. if you decide you like one better than the other, sell the extra barrel here on THR or ebay. you'll recover most of your expense. or keep it and have two guns in one. either one will serve you well as a defensive round, as long as you practice lots and lots with it. that said, i'm a fan of the .40S&W. i use the Cor-Bon 135 grain round and feel very comfortable with my setup. i have limited expereice with the .357Sig. it was fun to shoot. pretty snappy, but certainly not unmanagable. practice ammo for it is a little more spendy than the .40. let us know what you decide on.

Bobby

AnklePocket
December 27, 2003, 06:31 PM
I've got a P229 with both barrels (from Bar-Sto). IMHO, the .357 Sig shoots like a laser and is more fun to shoot. The .40 is probably more practical (in most cases) being larger and slower. I'm the opposite of a pack-rat or collector so I try to keep it minimal, but I can't decide which I like better overall so both is the only viable option, I think. If I had to absolutely pick one it would probably be the .40.

Gabe
December 27, 2003, 10:36 PM
I don't have an opinon about the 357sig. However its detractors tend to only use the 125 grainer tests to prove their point. That is hardly fair. While 9mm tend to work better with lighter bullets that doesnot mean it's appropriet for the 357sig.

I'd like to see tests with 147 grainers and double deniem over gellatin before any conclusions are drawn.

jc2
December 27, 2003, 11:24 PM
Gabe -

Right now, the most commonly available (and certainly the most commonly used) 357 SIG loads are the 125-grain loads. So far as I know, only one major ammunition company (Hornady) is manufacturing and selling 147-grain 357 SIG ammunition (and I have never seen it). FWIW, you are already getting pretty near ideal performance with 125-grain loads--and the 9x19 readily duplicates their performance with 124, 127 and 147 grain loads.

Gabe
December 28, 2003, 04:35 AM
jc2,

I see. I don't have a 357sig. One reason is the relatively skim pickings. I think there is potential there if they match the right bullets with the case.

jc2
December 28, 2003, 10:02 AM
Maybe, but right now the 357 SIG is pretty much of a "one pony show."

LoneWulf
December 28, 2003, 09:45 PM
Better to have a 10mm and load up or down as needed.

Ahhhh, a voice of reason.

I don't care for either the 40sw or the 357sig.
I have several 10mm's, so I have no use for the lesser cartridges at all. :D

Poohgyrr
December 29, 2003, 12:03 AM
Get a 10mm and load it up or down as needed.

Otayyyyy, just get a real gun, Smith N frame, in .41, .44, or .45 LC, and load it up or down as needed. :neener: :neener:

Delmar
December 29, 2003, 03:36 AM
I did not see it mentioned, but if its a concern, the 357 SIG dies for reloading are going to be more expensive due to the bottleneck design.

cratz2
December 30, 2003, 01:26 PM
I don't dislike the 357 SIG for any reason at all... have nothing against it whatsoever. Having said that, a much stronger case can be made against it than for it.

Cons: A given gun will hold fewer rounds than will the 9mm.

You might possibly end up with a 357 SIG round in a .40 barrel (not a big deal but I sure wouldn't want to be part of it happening the other way around.)

Dramatically more expensive than 9mm for practice loads.

Greatly reduced 'on shelf' selection compared to 9mm, .40S&W or 45ACP.

Snappier/more muzzle flip than any other cartridge I've ever shot considering weight of gun.

Pros: You get 100-200 fps over stronger 9mm loads. That's it!

If one wishes to make a case for a round with a larger than .35 caliber hole, then I can follow that. I just can't see that the 200 fps advantage of a 357 Magnum or a 357 SIG will provide a stunningly more effective advantage over a +P 9mm. And I don't see the 357SIG for a practical option for a civilian defensive handgun... If you don't shoot much and you come across a good deal on one, then sure... Or if you have a 40S&W and want the ability to fire different rounds. But not as a one gun answer.

At least not for me. ;)

Sean Smith
December 30, 2003, 03:02 PM
Having owned both previously (and neither now :p ), my take on it is that the anti-.357 Sig folks are rather overstating their case.

Extra recoil? Seemed about the same to me going from a .40 to a .357 Sig barrel in the Glock 35 I had. The Sig is louder and has more of a "blast," but not by much. Both calibers are loud and snappy, and either one will leave your ears ringing if fired indoors.

Observation: .40 S&W practice ammo is almost all mild 180gr subsonic loads, while .357 Sig practice ammo is loaded up to at or near the same ballistics as the premium self-defense loads. Full-power 165gr .40 S&W loads are no nicer to shoot than full power 125gr .357 Sig loads, at least for me.

More muzzle flash? No. Muzzle flash is dictated by the specific load, with premium self-defense loads in either caliber having flash suppressants to reduce muzzle flash. Out of similar barrel lengths with comparable quality ammo the brightness of the muzzle flash was not much either way.

Comparing the hottest stuff in each caliber that you can actually get off the shelf (all courtesy of Cor-Bon's published figures):

9x19 125gr +P: 1,250 ft/sec, 434 ft-lbs
.40 S&W 150gr: 1,200 ft/sec, 480 ft-lbs (+10%)
.45 ACP 200gr +P: 1,050 ft/sec, 490 ft-lbs (+13%)
.357Sig 125gr: 1,425 ft/sec, 546 ft-lbs (+26%)

For those more interested in ballistic gelatin tests, if you compare the .357 Sig to the 9x19 test results at Ammolab.com, you will see that total or near-total (<.40") failures to expand when shot through 4 layers of denim were far less common with .357 Sig than they were with 9x19 (8/49 in 9mm Section 1 vs. 2/36 for .357 Sig Section 1).

http://www.ammolab.com/357_sig_1.htm
http://www.ammolab.com/9mm_section1.htm

Citing the performance of gee-whiz LEO only +P+ stuff in 9x19 to prove parity with .357 Sig is a bit of a stretch, considering how hard it can be to buy the stuff at all.

That said, I personally prefer 9x19, .45 ACP and 10mm Auto to either .40 S&W or .357 Sig.

RandyB
December 30, 2003, 03:14 PM
I'd opt for the .40. Better choice of ammo and better bullet weights. The .357 sig is just a souped up 9mm. I'll take the .40 any day and the 9mm (with +P/ +p+) over the 357.

355sigfan
December 31, 2003, 04:32 AM
The 357 sig is more accurate in general. The 40sw is more readily available. The both kick about the same if full power 155 and 165 grain 40's are compared to full power 125 grain 357 sigs. 180 grain 40's kick a tad less than the 357 sig. I am getting to the point I prefer a 9mm with +p+ ammo to either.
Pat

M58
December 31, 2003, 10:45 PM
pat is correct.
I sold my .357s and got a 9mm.
Still have the 10mms however.

FireInTheHole
January 1, 2004, 02:13 PM
135gr Corbon PRB, from a Glock 22, through 4-layers of 14oz. denim. Reference source is ammolab. (Vel= 1311fps/ Pen= 14.1"/ Exp= .64).......

Bah, I can beat corbon 135gr by 200fps using 12gr of longshot and a nosler 135gr in my g22. (Averaged 1482fps out of my 4.5" barrel)

Now if they would just sell a gold dot (or ANY premium manstopper) in 135gr! (I have often thought of pulling some powRball bullets and reloading with longshot...)

Has anybody performed penetration tests with nosler 135gr in .40 or 10mm???

J.M.
January 1, 2004, 02:57 PM
I'm not sure that either would be my choice for a defensive auto...both rounds feel more like service rounds to me. More at home in large frame steel guns.

For defensive autos I think that I'd be looking more to 9mm or .45 auto. They just feel more at home in smaller guns to me.

But that wasn't your question...I won't rehash everything that everybody else has said, but one thing went unmentioned. .357 sig being a bottle-necked round is about as jam proof as a round can get. All that little bullet has to do if fall into the huge opening at the rear of the chamber and it's golden. The reloader also has more choices as to bullet design...the hugest hollow points imagionable will feed without a hitch. The down side to the reloader is that it is a bottle-necked round, and straight walled cartiridges are less of a pain to deal with.

Having said all that .357 sig is the modern armor penatrator that the .38 super was designed to be.

Nice round that .38 super..... But that isn't what you asked either. - JM.

355sigfan
January 1, 2004, 04:50 PM
I won't rehash everything that everybody else has said, but one thing went unmentioned. .357 sig being a bottle-necked round is about as jam proof as a round can get.
END

Thats the theory but its not reality. The bottle neck design is difficult to feed. In my Glock 33 it was prone to nose dive feeding malfunctions. The same was true of a BHP I had converted from 40sw to 357 sig. Many of your Glocks need FML mags to feed 357 sig. There is no such problem with the 9mm. There are many very reliable 357 sig guns but the 9mm with its tapered case seems to have the edge in real guns.
Pat

AnklePocket
January 1, 2004, 05:39 PM
When you cut through it all: .357 Sig = Pure Shooting Joy. This makes the arguement irrelevent.
Disclaimer:
I'm a hasbeen and occassionally enter "wanna-be" status (,but never "could've-been" because I really was).

cratz2
January 1, 2004, 06:12 PM
As far as feeding smoothly rankings go, 10s really seem to feed the most smoothly to me. Not just in Glocks but in most any medium to full sized pistols. I don't know if anyone's done much research into it or not and I guess it's really pretty silly considering how many rounds of 9mm have been fed through Glocks, Berettas and SIGs but if I was a bettin' man (which I'm not) I'd put my money on 10mms feeding the smoothest and most consistantly.

355sigfan
January 1, 2004, 06:59 PM
Actually the 10mm is a difficult round to designe a gun to feed. The FBI wanted 10mm in its HRT pistols. But all the custom smiths told them it could not be done and meet the FBI reliability requirments. The 10mm is a long cartridge with no taper. Most of the bullets are truncated cone shaped. I found my Glock 21 far more tolerant for feeding lots of different handloads than my Glock 20 was. Their are reliable 10mm's but thats a testimate to the gun designes not the cartridges feed reliability.
Pat

355sigfan
January 1, 2004, 07:03 PM
As for overall reliability. I do have some test results of semi auto pistol testing done by the Department of Justice. They did not test the 10mm. But they found that nearly all the 9mm's and 45's pased their requirments while about 40% of the 40sw and 357 sig guns did. The results are a bit dated as they are from 1999.
Pat

cratz2
January 1, 2004, 07:05 PM
I was thinking more of guns that were designed with the 10mm in mind or those that underwent actual physical changes to incorporate the 10mm round such as the Smiths and Glocks more than the 1911s.

Though I'm sure Sean will tell us that some 10mm 1911s run just fine. ;)

berto
January 1, 2004, 08:19 PM
With capacities being equal,I'd rather have the larger bullet and heavier weights.:)

ProCharger
January 2, 2004, 06:26 PM
anyone have anything similar to what jnb01 posted in comparison of a .40 S&W and 9mm? just curious and thought i would spare starting a new thread.

355sigfan
January 2, 2004, 06:52 PM
Check ammolab.com and look under the test results.
Pat

ProCharger
January 2, 2004, 06:52 PM
Just found it a minute ago.....thanks.

Sean Smith
January 2, 2004, 08:14 PM
Though I'm sure Sean will tell us that some 10mm 1911s run just fine.

Well, I've always found it odd that some folks say 10mm is a poor feeder because of its OAL, when it has exactly the same OAL as .45 ACP. ;)

In a 1911, 10mm will be a better feeder than .40 S&W because it is closer to the OAL of .45 ACP. Guys with game guns in .40 S&W often handload it to near-10mm OAL for just that reason.

J.M.
January 2, 2004, 09:22 PM
Sigfan,

I'm not one to bicker about such things, but are you sure that malfunctions that you discribe weren't magizine issues?

What I was pointing out was that from a reloaders standpoint, we finally have an auto round that doesn't rely on bullet profile for feeding dependability.

But if you've had guns that had feeding issues with this round, there might be reason for consern...of course I can't think of a single round that I haven't seen have problems in at least one gun or anougher. - JM.

355sigfan
January 2, 2004, 09:41 PM
JM no problem. Not trying to bicker either. However from what I have read and from what I have experienced. The 10mm is not a very feed reliably cartridge. The FBI had to go with 45 acp because the smiths said they coudl not make a 10mm reliable enough. My 20 was finicky with certain bullet profiles. The 10mm is tall and abrupt in shape its not an ideal shaped round for feeding. If it had a tapered case like the 9mm it may have been a different story.
Pat

rrb
January 4, 2004, 03:43 AM
My own experience is that I've seen the Glock 19 jam many many times with 9mm, but my Glock 33 has never jammed with .357SIG no matter how "limp wristed" I shoot it.

355sigfan
January 4, 2004, 06:17 AM
I got rid of my 33 due to nose dive feeding malfunctions.
Pat

jetman
January 4, 2004, 11:00 AM
I bought one of the first Sig P229's (.40) when they were intoduced and have put many hundreds of rounds through it over the years with the ONLY malfuntions EVER were when my 12 year old son shot it a little limp wristed. I have since bought the .357 barrel from Sig and didn't see a huge difference either way. It is a little sharper in recoil over the .40 but just as accurate as always. The .40 ammo is cheaper but the .357 seems a little hotter. Not a big enough difference to me to make a clear choice. I probably won't ever sell it but today prefer a compact 1911 series .45 like my LW Stealth SDS.

rrb
January 4, 2004, 12:20 PM
I got rid of my 33 due to nose dive feeding malfunctions.
Pat

------------------------

Hmm! Good to know. Totally different experience than me and my model 33. Could you attribute the jams to any particular ammo? I guess not since you got rid of it.

I'm really only familiar with my own Glock 33 which has been 100%. But I've seen many many 9mm Glocks in action in NY on my job and the NYCPD job, and I've seen them jam many times (mostly the 19, but the 26 too). They always have some excuse like "limp wristing". I NEVER want to hear that limp wristing excuse for ANY gun because who the hell knows how you are going to be able to hold a gun in an emergency situation.

rrb
January 4, 2004, 12:39 PM
To be fair to the 9mm Glocks, many, but by no means all, of those jams were with reloads.

jc2
January 4, 2004, 02:14 PM
Like any weapon, when you start modifying the original design (G17), you tend to lose a certain degree of reliability--the G19 (and to a lesser extent the G26) are prime examples.

That being said, the 357 SIG really offers no feed reliability advantage over the 9x19 (which is BTW, a tapered design), and in fact, as previously noted, the bottle-neck design (and particularly as implemented by SIG) has its own set of reliability problems.

The first and foremost, as noted by PAT and others, is a tendency to nose-dive. The tendency can be exacerbated by several factors including mildly weakened magazine springs (which would still work with any other cartridge) and dirty magazines, (or dirty, dusty, sandy conditions--no matter how assiduously you maintain your magazines--probably PAT's problem in the Yukon Delta). Other reliability issues with the 357 SIG include: (1) lack of case neck tension (particularly a design problem of the 357 SIG--the case neck is just plain too short); (3) the need to "headspace" in two places on the case mouth and on the case shoulder (again, a design problem--bottle-neck cartridges should headspace on the shoulder and not the case mouth); (4) that funnel shaped chamber which is so good at "catching" .36 calibre bullets is also well suited for catching debris which remains in the chamber instead of falling out the barrel--the old .40+ calibre in but .36- calibre out trick.

The problem with the 357 SIG (and the .40 S&W) is they are both compromise rounds--an attempt to force performance into a 9x19 size platform instead of going to the logical step and designing an intermediate size weapon (between the 9x19 size platform and the 10mm/.45 ACP size platform)--much like the S&W L-frame and Ruger GP100 which fall between the K-frame and N-frame (or Rehawk) size.

The good news is that finally, the 9x19 is being optimized to provide performance which is at the very least equal to the 357 SIG while still maintaining all the advantages of 9x19 (low muzzle flip/blast, high-capacity and feed-reliability). The 357 SIG may have been a good round in its time, but it has definitely been OBE'd (overcome by events).

355sigfan
January 4, 2004, 02:46 PM
Tried differend kinds of ammo and putting in extra power mag spings. The problem seldom came up when I was shooting 2 handed. It usually surfaced in the weak hand portion of the qualification. It was probably limp wristing. But thats a hard problem to cure with your weak hand. But the problem was more pronounced with the 33 apparenty becuase my other autos gave me no problem weak handed. Bottle neck rounds are suseptible to nose dive malfunctions. My 31 has not given me a problem either. I plan on getting a 26.
Pat

jc2
January 4, 2004, 05:57 PM
Doesn't limp-wristing normally result in failure to eject rather than failure to feed problems?

355sigfan
January 4, 2004, 09:19 PM
JC2 actually I have seen nose dives due to limp wristing because the slide is cycling fast on these small guns and its not going as far back as it normally would when it grabs the next round. And not having sufficient energy to push it up into the chamber it catches on the feed ramp. Its a difficult malfunciton to clear one handed with your weak hand. (I have a rule if I am shooting strong or weak handed and get a malfunciton I clear it one handed.)

I have also seen pistols not go completely into battery from limp wristing.
Pat

Coffee357
January 4, 2004, 10:40 PM
I'm looking at a .357 sig for a hunting backup / finishing gun just because I think a high penetrating jacketed flat point might just be the ticket. The fact that it comes in 9mm sized packages is a definite plus. The .40 to me doesn't do anything significantly better (or worse) than 9's or .45's to peak my interest. That being said, I'll probably get another one eventually.

Coffee

gabeodog
January 5, 2004, 03:42 PM
I like them both. .40 is cheaper. but .357 is more Peppy. Plus more fun to shoot. I think anyway.

cratz2
January 5, 2004, 03:53 PM
Call me Mr Overkill but if I were specifically seeking a finishing gun, I'd personally seek out a 41 or 44 Magnum... Something I could legitimately hunt with in it's own right.

Of if wanting a pistol, maybe a 10mm and use full loads in it.

Coffee357
January 5, 2004, 04:34 PM
Hey "Mr. Overkill" :D ,

Just think plastic / alluminum is lighter and more weather resistant. Not arguing that more power is generally better. The full sized autos (most 10mm's) just don't fit me right. The most serious competition to the .357 Sig for my uses would probably be a 3" J-frame .357 Mag. In the auto cartridge I'm looking at the Glock 32 or the Sig P239.


Coffee

cratz2
January 5, 2004, 05:30 PM
Yeah... even though I've shot 10mm Glocks on several occassions, when just quick posting, I always forget that the grip is bigger on the 10mms than the 9s/40s/357s. And I STILL don't know why they don't offer 45 or 10mm in the mid-sized platform. I mean, I know it would have to be a whole new frame and yadda yadda... But still, a 10mm sized the same as the 19/23/32 (but with the larger grip) would be nice.

FireInTheHole
January 5, 2004, 07:46 PM
How about a G36 sized single stack 10mm? hehehe "BOOOM! oh no... I think I broke my wrist!"

jc2
January 5, 2004, 08:44 PM
It would definitely be the "Bic Lighter of Handguns"--shoot a mag, and throw it away!.

earl_simmons
January 7, 2004, 07:10 PM
No real problems with .357 SIG ammo availability - Georgia Arms (http://www.georgia-arms.com/canned.htm) - about $173/1000 rounds including shipping.

jc2
January 7, 2004, 07:44 PM
or you could buy 1500 rounds of 9x19 for the same price. I like to shoot a lot.

earl_simmons
January 8, 2004, 05:29 PM
or you could buy 1500 rounds of 9x19 for the same price. I like to shoot a lot.

1500 rounds of +P or +P+ 9 mm ball ammunition? If not, the prices are not comparable.

AnklePocket
January 8, 2004, 05:34 PM
Stop it. I can't take much more. You'll get my 9s, .40s, .357 sigs and .45s from my cold, dead hands. I may even get a 10mm Glock 29 in protest of this thread. Don't make me do it. Don't...

jc2
January 8, 2004, 07:08 PM
1500 rounds of +P or +P+ 9 mm ball ammunition? If not, the prices are not comparable.
1500 rounds of practice ammo (Canned Heat--just like you)--the prices are not comparable.

earl_simmons
January 8, 2004, 08:34 PM
1500 rounds of practice ammo (Canned Heat--just like you)--the prices are not comparable.

1500 rounds of 9mm NATO Canned Heat actually sells for $213. The price per case for the 9mm NATO is only $30 less than that for the .357 SIG and the ballistics are not at all equivalent. I am working on the assumption (based on a previous post) that you believe +P or +P+ 9mm ballistics equal .357 SIG ballistics. I am also assuming that any comparison of practice ammunition costs for the 9mm and .357 SIG involves ball ammunition that performs similarly as the best defense loads for the two calibers. This is based on the understanding that one will practice with ammunition that shoots like the premium rounds that would most likely be selected for defensive purposes. Otherwise, such a comparison is pointless as several weapons in either caliber can be converted to .22 LR for use with "light" practice loads. Similarly, .357 SIG pistols offered by SIG and Glock (and perhaps other manufacturers) can be converted to fire 9mm with a simple barrel switch.

Miami357
January 8, 2004, 09:14 PM
Earl, Your opinion on the 357Sig???

I shot the Springfield XD40 and also the XD357. I found that I shot the 357Sig a bit better, so I bought it!!! Still haven't bought any ammo for it, but planning on Georgia Arms soon. (already sent them copy of permit). The shop that sold it to me offered to qualify me to add it to my CCW permit at no charge, i.e., they included ammo. I was very pleased with my qual session.

Also own the XD9, and practice with, and use for daily carry the Speer 124 +P JHP, which I have been able to get in boxes of 250 at local gun show at a pretty good price, but don't know how much longer they will be available. (Batch numbers were not on the recall list).

Lastly, what is Canned Heat ammo? Where do you buy this ammo?

jc2
January 8, 2004, 09:34 PM
Lot of assumptions there, Earl! The bottom line remains you can still shoot the 9x19 considerably cheaper than the 357 SIG. You might want to compare the 9x19 124-grain +P Gold Dots at $240 per thousand versus 357 SIG Gold Dots at $310. You pay almost 30% more (almost the same ratio as the "Canned Heat") for the 357 SIG for no increase in terminal effectiveness. There is nothing wrong with the 357 SIG, but you obtain the same effectiveness with the 9x19 about 30% cheaper (or shoot approximately one third more--depending on how you want to look at it).

Mamia357 - http://www.georgia-arms.com/canned.htm

earl_simmons
January 8, 2004, 10:02 PM
jc2: Ammunition costs will indeed be higher with the .357 SIG, but it has certainly not been established that the 9mm can match its effectiveness. Looking at the two loads mentioned in your post (9mm 124 gr +P Gold dots and .357 SIG 125 gr Gold Dots offered by Georgia Arms), we see clear differences in ballistic properties: 124 gr bullet mass @ 1200 fps generating 396 ft-lbs for the 9mm versus 125 gr bullet mass @ 1400 fps generating 544 ft-lbs for the .357 SIG. How much of an effect these differences have on a target and if any such effect justifies higher ammunition costs is debatable, but I don't believe one can assume that the two rounds show identical performance.

Miami357
January 8, 2004, 10:12 PM
jc2, Thanks for the link to the 9mm Canned Heat. Are there any disadvantages to using re-manufactured ammo? This would only be for target shooting, and looking at the price, it is still slightly higher than Winchester White Box (110 gr?) from WalMart.

Disregard the above statement on cost. I just rechecked, the 115 gr, at $109.95 for 1000 rounds is a slightly better value than the WWB at WallyWorld. The 124gr NATO is just a little more at $129.95, which I will probably order with my 357Sig order from Georgia-Arms.

jc2
January 8, 2004, 11:10 PM
Earl -
but it has certainly not been established that the 9mm can match its effectiveness.
Actually, it has been pretty well established. The best 9x19 and 357 SIG ammunition are delivering virtually identical penetration and expansion (approximately 16 inches penetration and expansion in the low to mid .60s). The top 9x19 rounds are delivering similar performance to top 357 SIG rounds in actual LE usage. Testing indicates very similar intermediate barrier performance with the best 9x19 and 357 SIG ammunition.

Ten years or so ago, when the 357 SIG was introduced, that little extra MV and ME might have made for a more effective round overall, but thanks to the state of development of modern bullets, their effectiveness is virtually identical. When compared using the best of today's modern bullets, the 357 SIG offers no increase in terminal effectiveness. Currently, both the 9x19 and 357 SIG are capable of delivering optimum performance with their class of .36 calibre rounds (and there is no difference in the optimum performance between the two rounds). Unfortunately, all the negatives (increase muzzle flip, increased muzzle blast, lower capacity, greater wear and tear on the weapon and the shooter, and siginficantly higher cost) of that extra MV and ME remain. The 357 SIG has largely been OBE'd (overcome by events) thanks to modern .36 calibre bullets available to both the 9x19 and 357 SIG.

Miami -

You might watch your shipping costs with Georgia Arms (but you very close to them so it might not be to bad). Even as far as live, the shipping is usually less than the sales tax if I purchase locally. As for disadvantages of remanufactured ammunition, I have shot literally thousands of rounds of Georgia Arms without problems. (To be honest, I've had more problems with some factory new ammo--UMC and PMC to be specific--than Georgia Arms remanufactured stuff. Remember, Georgia Arms is a very large operation and major suppler to LE. They have good quality control in my experience (and care about their customers). You might check their "Shear Power" loads for carry--at their prices you can afford to practice with your carry loads.

Beav
January 8, 2004, 11:42 PM
In the case where we have the same bullets traveling at different velocities but having the same terminal ballistics, do you think the extra energy accounts for anything?
Surely the extra energy is still there and being transfered to the target? Is there something else that these tests should be testing for? In the end it might be trivial or it may be extra insurance but I would like to know why there isn't any difference.

jc2
January 8, 2004, 11:55 PM
Beav, it has been pretty well documented that velocity and energy, in and of themselves, do not cause injury (i.e., are not wounding agents) with the velocity and energy levels achieved by handgun rounds. Modern bullets are designed work (penetrate and expand) within certain velocity (energy) "windows." The 357 SIG bullet is designed to require more velocity (energy) to work. That extra energy the 357 SIG generates is required to obtain optimum penetration and expansion for the 357 SIG bullet. If a person wants to believe that relatively small amount of velocity and energy difference "does something," they are certainly free to believe (faith is a marvelous) thing, but all the hard documentation strongly indicates that velocity and energy are NOT wounding agents at the velocity and energy levels achieved by handguns. Basically, a little more of nothing is still nothing.

cratz2
January 8, 2004, 11:58 PM
I do not count myself among the 357 SIG fans on this board. I am confident in the abilities of the 124 +P Gold Dots and the 127 +P+ Rangers out of a 9mm. But by almost all counts and almost all sources, when both cases are filled to what are accepted as safe pressures, the 357 SIG bullets are traveling faster than those of the 9mm. As long as we're talking quality or 'premium' expanding hollow points, I don't see how the 9mm will be quite as effective as the 357 SIG... I just don't see it. Not talking 'street performance' or 'one shot stop percentages' but actual expansion and actual foot lbs of energy transferred... The 357 SIG must have more energy much as the 10mm (when loaded properly) must have more energy than the 40S&W.

Now, for my money, I'd rather have a 9mm and be able to practice with uber cheap 9mm ammo and carry a smaller 9mm that any 357 SIG, but I don't doubt the effectiveness of the 357 SIG nor do I doubt the superiority of the 357 SIG over the 9mm when wanting maximum fb/lbs and/or maximum penetration with an expanding hollow point bullet.

earl_simmons
January 9, 2004, 12:02 AM
Actually, it has been pretty well established. The best 9x19 and 357 SIG ammunition are delivering virtually identical penetration and expansion (approximately 16 inches penetration and expansion in the low to mid .60s). The top 9x19 rounds are delivering similar performance to top 357 SIG rounds in actual LE usage. Testing indicates very similar intermediate barrier performance with the best 9x19 and 357 SIG ammunition.

What are the sources for this determination? I am indeed surprised if researchers are consistently finding identical wound cavities (simulated and actual) with the two cartridges.

Unfortunately, all the negatives (increase muzzle flip, increased muzzle blast, lower capacity, greater wear and tear on the weapon and the shooter, and siginficantly higher cost) of that extra MV and ME remain.

Differences in muzzle flip/blast are minimal between .357 SIG and 9mm +P/+P+, and magazine capacity differences are also not considerable (especially for post-ban magazines). I am also not convinced that a substantial difference in wear/tear exists. If anything, wear/tear might be worse with a 9mm weapon using +P/+P+ ammunition (particularly with weapons designed for use with standard-pressure ammunition). Finally, ammunition cost differences might be meaningful for some shooters; however, they are usually exaggerated by 9mm proponents (by comparing prices for standard-pressure 9mm ball with .357 SIG ball).

Beav
January 9, 2004, 12:15 AM
jc2, from what your saying the 357SIG and 9mm use different bullets? I guess I need to know if the 357SIG is a 9mm bullet, I got that impression. I don't reload but I thought that they were the same and could be loaded with that regard.

If this is true and we took the 9mm round used in this test and made it even faster to match the 357sig, it would not increase its effectiveness, correct? We have basically reached a maximum effective velocity for our current 9mm bullets?

If this is false, then the 357sig bullet needs more research. It is failing because the bullet design itself is underperforming. With more advances we should eventually expect even more performance fromt he 357sig?

_________________________________________________________

My original question was regarding the same bullet out of the two different cases traveling at different velocities and yet producing the same terminal ballisitics. I'm not really concerned with which round is a better performer, ballistically they are good enough that it really comes down to shot placement IMO. What I want to know is what is happening from a scientific POV to this energy if in fact the terminal ballistics are the same.

Thanks

jc2
January 9, 2004, 10:53 AM
Beav -
jc2, from what your saying the 357SIG and 9mm use different bullets? I guess I need to know if the 357SIG is a 9mm bullet, I got that impression. I don't reload but I thought that they were the same and could be loaded with that regard.
Yes, the major manufacturers Speer, Winchester, etc. use different bullets for the 9x19 and 357 SIG. Yes, the 357 SIG is "9mm bullet" in the sense that it has a diameter of 9 millimeters (just like the 9x19), but that is where the resemblance ends.
If this is true and we took the 9mm round used in this test and made it even faster to match the 357sig, it would not increase its effectiveness, correct?
No, if you took the 9x19 bullet and made "it even faster to match the 357sig [sic]," it would be less effective because it is designed to work within a specific velocity "window." If it is driven too fast, effectiveness would deteriorate as overexpansion, fragmentation and underpenetration become distinct possibilies.
If this is false, then the 357sig bullet needs more research. It is failing because the bullet design itself is underperforming. With more advances we should eventually expect even more performance fromt he 357sig?
That is a very big (and very wrong) assumption. Most 357 SIG bullets are well-designed and perform very well. There are limits to what can be done with .36 calibre 124/125/127-grain bullets. It appears the 9x19 and 357 SIG has just about reached the optimum level of performance with .36 calibre bullets that will work in them. Frankly, I just do not "expect even more performance fromt [sic] he[sic] 357sig[sic]" because there's just not a whole lot of room for improvement for .36 calibre bullets of a length/weight that will be reliable in the 357 SIG.

rrb
January 10, 2004, 10:51 PM
Anybody have current info on what agencies are now using the 357SIG? Has any agency switched back to the 9 or to another caliber after adopting the 357SIG? Have any agencies recently switched over to the 357SIG?

yongxingfreesty
June 13, 2006, 03:01 PM
prefer 357sig for the range and home defense. would also prefer 357sig for carry, i know a couple of officers that carry the 357sig +p

Capt. Jas
August 7, 2006, 07:32 PM
I had a Glock .33 in .357 SIG but I didn't like it and ended up giving it to my dad. It was a snappy, yappy, little beast that hurt my ears and over penetrated.

I could send 5 slugs through two wet Sears catalogs and an aluminum frying pan really fast but just think of all that lost energy. Well the first X-mas after I gave it to dad I gave him a .40 barrel for it and this past X-mas he got a lasermax sight for it LOL.

Its an okay pistol but I'm going to stick with my S&W 25-5 revolver in .45 colt for now anyway.

Oh, I think I should mention this in case it hasn't been mentioned above. Some of you guys advised to get the .40 THEN convert it to .357 SIG. I just don't think that would be safe. I think you should get the .357 THEN convert it to a .40 if that's what you want to do. Just MHO.

OOH-RAH!

Jas

Cousin Mike
August 7, 2006, 08:18 PM
...I own all kinds of guns in different calibers, and at the moment I'm going through a revolver infatuation... so I'm not just blindly biased towards .357 Sig (anymore :neener: ). I own both barrels for my Sig Pro, so I actually have experience firing both rounds from the exact same gun. These are just my honest thoughts on the subject. I didn't read the entire thread before posting, so I doubt I'll say anything that hasn't already been said 20 times... but, here goes.

My .40 barrel is lonely... I never take it out anymore. There's nothing the .40 can do that the .357 Sig can't do better and faster, IMO. It is bigger, but not by enough to make me feel that it's a better round. If I want bigger I get the .45's out.

Shooting .40 to me just feels like '9mm snap' mixed with '.45 torque.' It has snap, but it also pushes my hands upwards a bit, which makes for longer time between follow-up shots. .357Sig is more snappy with a lot less torque. The .357Sig snaps straight back very quickly, bringing me back on target faster. It comes back at you with a little authority, but it's manageable.

.357Sig is loud as hell... it has a lot of flash...
That's just a side benefit though :D

.357Sig was designed to replicate the performance of the .357 Magnum 125gr. load - probably the most successful one-shot-stop pistol round of all time. The .40 is a good size, and moves fast enough that it will drop most bad guys, but it's hardly replicating .357 Magnum ballistics.

.357Sig penetrates barriers (like car doors, automobile glass, etc.) better than .40S&W. This is why LEO's and departments around the country are starting to adopt the round as well.

I am more accurate with .357Sig.

.357 Sig costs me $13-$15 for a 50-box. A tad more expensive than .40, but once again not enough worth mentioning IMO, considering .40 is running $11-$12 per 50-rnd box. It's not hard to find either, if you have a Wal-Mart or sports store within driving distance. It's been a while since I've been somewhere that didn't carry .357Sig.

I know people who have bought .40 caliber guns, and didn't like them.
I've never met, or heard of anyone who owns a .357Sig and doesn't love it. Most of us who own them, love them and have nothing but praise for the round.

9mm = 9x19. IIRC, .357Sig uses a 9x21mm bullet... Don't hang anyone on that info, I could be dead wrong.

Now for overpenetration: I've never worried about overpenetration in any application. It's not a .50BMG - you're not going to kill someone a mile away if the bullet goes through the bad guy, which it probably won't. In the event that it does, I doubt you'll be mugged, robbed, or assaulted in such a crowded public place that bystanders are in danger of catching your rounds after they pass thru the BG. People who want to victimize you usually don't like big crowds.

If you're using JHP's, as most of us do, then don't even worry about it. I had an ND using some really hot .38Spl+P, and because of the room I was in and where I was, I basically ended up firing into my wall through a mirror at point blank range. The bullet hit a 2x4, knocked a chunk out of it the size of a quarter and lodged in the plywood about 5" back... This is from a gun w/a 4" barrel, once again at point blank range - the wall couldn't have been 2 ft. from the muzzle. It did NOT go through the wall... the bullet expanded, and it was so clogged with drywall that I doubt it could have gone through the other side if it still had enough velocity to keep going.

If the same bullet had traveled through a human body and clothing first, I doubt it would have done anything more than break the mirror and land on the floor.

Overpenetration makes 2 bleeding holes, instead of one... which incapacitates the bad guy faster. That's a good thing.

Underpenetration can get you killed. Obviously not such a good thing.

I'm sure the condition of your drywall would be the last thing on your mind after an SD shooting.

DonGlock26
August 9, 2006, 09:03 PM
Good post, Mike!


I have had the same experience with my P229. I haven't seen a round generate so much hate in a long time. It must be the lack of horror stories and general satisfaction of LE agencies that use it.:neener:

Here's a cool video I saw on Warrior Talk forum:

http://www.miragetechnologies.net/images/Video/SPEER%20Gold%20Dot%20357%20SIG.wmv

class14
August 13, 2006, 01:31 PM
Hello all. First off, glad to be a new member. Secondly I am looking into trading my g38(.45 g.a.p.) in on a g32, or g19. I really like how the g38 shoots, and it's actually a pretty accurate gun. The things just so darn slide heavy, it's really a pain to carry. When I was in the academy, my commander, who works for the Union Co. Sheriff, near Columbus OH was issued a g32. He loved it. He brought it to the range one day and did the milk jug test along with the g19 we were using. I was sold immediatly on the .357sig. The g19 just kind of put a hole in the jug. Nothing special. The g32 on the other hand, blew the jug into small unidentifiable parts. I only bring this up because if both the 9x19, and .357sig are so similar, or camparable, and velocity doesn't matter, then why did one milk jug live to see another day, and one have to be identified by dental records. I'm not trying to be a smart a*!, and i'm not pretending to be a gun expert, I'm just trying to understand.

fastbolt
August 13, 2006, 02:54 PM
Well, someone has been breathing life into this older thread ...

I went back and looked at my brief comments made back in Dec 2003 ... and I find that my thoughts haven't changed.

Enjoy whatever you like, or are issued.

It's just a defensive handgun.

I still place more of a premium on shooter ability and skill than I do caliber ...

Blacklabman
August 13, 2006, 03:37 PM
The .40S&W to me is the perfect SD caliber.
Very little recoil, high capacity and ultra reliable function with all manner of ball and HP rounds, from pistols such as the G23.
Ammo can be found at any Gunstore. Could care less, if Chinamart carries anything.
Ammo for the .40 compared to 9mm is only around 1.25 more per box. That means I shoot and practice alot. If a dollar twenty five ever break's me, I'll know I have a crappy job/career.

The .357Sig.
Recoil from the G31, G32 and G23 with conversion barrel is a non issue. Recoil is simply not there.
I have no issues with the .357Sig. I think it is a great round.

At 7-25 yards, I am simply more accurate with .40S&W.

Billy Wyrick
August 15, 2006, 12:25 AM
This item is a bit dated I believe. I remember reading a few years ago. Well, maybe more than a few years ago. Evan Marshall had been compling the one shot stops with Ed Sanow, and they put the list together. If my old thinking cap serves me right, Evan noted he had started carrying the .357 Sig as his carry gun. I sure do wish I knew what he carries today? I like the .357 Sig. The bottleneck case feeds better than any straight walled case. IMHO of course!!! The round that has gotten overlooked in the last number of years is the 400 Cor-Bon. Dog Gone shame it was not named the 400 Magnum Colt and put in a 5" Colt 1911. But then, I am not in charge of marketing. I like this round better than any .40 S&W round. It would have sold like ice cold drinks at the gates of Hades.
Billy Wyrick
University of R. E. & D.
Director, of Dept. of B.S.

slocum
August 18, 2006, 09:00 PM
I only saw it once - in response #86 by fastbolt - but the most important thing in this whole debate is not the ammo. It's shot placement.

I think anyone who really knows the facts about using a pistol in self defense wil ltell you that you can stop somone with a single, well-placed .38 special round.

I would also say that considering that the heat of a fight will almost certainly make you miss if you actually shoot then the most apporpriate thing to be thinking about is not how fast the round is going but rather, how slow it can go and still do the job.

Take the .40 for more ammo capacity. Take a .45 for a big slow bullet that will put almost anyone down instantly and without fanfare.

s

SDGlock23
August 20, 2006, 02:50 AM
I shoot both .40 and 357 SIG out of my Glock 23, and they're both good choices. If I had to choose, I'd stick with the .40.

The 357 SIG is in fact touted as replicating .357 Mag ballistics and it does a good job, but I've read reports that officers in the field have had better results with the .40 S&W than with the .357 Mag.

Now since the .40 S&W can outperform the 357 SIG with nearly identical bullet weights, (same case, larger bullet...much like 300 Win Mag vs. 7mm Rem Mag) then why is the 357 SIG equal to .357 Magnum ballistics, but a .40 S&W is nowhere near the .357 Mag, as Cousin Mike stated?

And come on' ya'll, it's 357 SIG not ".357"

Cousin Mike
August 20, 2006, 11:59 AM
Now since the .40 S&W can outperform the 357 SIG with nearly identical bullet weights, (same case, larger bullet...much like 300 Win Mag vs. 7mm Rem Mag) then why is the 357 SIG equal to .357 Magnum ballistics, but a .40 S&W is nowhere near the .357 Mag, as Cousin Mike stated?


This is simply what everything I've read indicates - same as any other info given on the board. I also was unaware that the .40 outperformed the .357Sig... in anything. I didn't say that .357Sig was equal to .357 Magnum.. What I said was

.357Sig was designed to replicate the performance of the .357 Magnum 125gr. load - probably the most successful one-shot-stop pistol round of all time. The .40 is a good size, and moves fast enough that it will drop most bad guys, but it's hardly replicating .357 Magnum ballistics.

.357Sig moves faster than .40S&W, and uses the same bullet weights as the .357 magnum. The .40 has completely different #'s when it comes to bullet weight, speed, ft.lbs. of energy, etc. The .357Sig replicating the ballistics of the .357 Magnum has nothing to do with how effective or ineffective a round the .40S&W is.

Redneck with a 40
August 20, 2006, 02:27 PM
Corbon 135 grain .40 = 1325 fps/526 ft lbs muzzel energy. Thats right there with the 357 magnum, but with larger bullet diameter.:D

crebralfix
August 20, 2006, 05:35 PM
Remember, all pistols stink ballistically when compared to a full powered rifle!

You'll *probably* end up shooting the goblin multiple times to stop the attack. This is why we train with double taps, emergency drills, and Wilsons. In the end, it doesn't matter what you're using so long as you can control the weapon during rapid fire.

M58
August 24, 2006, 08:58 AM
Wow!
Still going.
:D

critrxdoc
August 26, 2006, 05:51 PM
.357 sig
115gr
1550fps / 614 ft. lbs.
125gr
1450fps / 584 ft. lbs.
147gr
1250fps / 510 ft. lbs.

.40 caliber
135gr JHP
1375fps / 567 ft/lbs
155gr JHP
1275fps / 560 ft/lbs
180gr
1100fps / 484 ft/lbs

The sig may carry 50-100 more fps depending on the weight, but smaller diameter. You make the pick.

erict
August 29, 2006, 01:23 AM
I own 4-.40S&W pistols and 1 chambered in .357Sig.

I like shooting my Glock 32 better than any of my .40 cals.

The Sig round has a more of a "straight back" recoil for me instead of a "flip up" feel that the .40 has.

I also shoot a little more accurately with the .357 round than the .40 but it's not really even noticeable.

Fun factor........ no comparison. The .357 Sig puts a smile on my face everytime I shoot it. :D

Super Trucker
August 29, 2006, 10:56 PM
The FBI uses .40

The Secret Service uses .357 sig

In my opinion they are both great rounds, just pick one and practice with it.

MattXYZ
June 28, 2007, 06:30 PM
I got a SIG 226 .357/.40. First off, a 5% of an inch more diameter isnt enough to be that decisive of its wounding potential, especially on the receiving end. The .357 is a force to be reckoned with. The .357SIG has incredible long range accuracy. The trajectory is straight as a laser beam. A shot to wet newspaper with GA. ARMS 125GR 1400FPS(prob near 1450 out of my 41/2" barrel) causes a 3" wide entrance
crater with nominal penetration. The COR-BON 125gr HP are even more brutal as they replicate a 357 mag HP performance completely. Its not just a
9mm+P++, it actually pushes the round to its structural limits, sometimes almost turning HPs inside out or fragmenting 'em Completely, like a .357mag. Engineers had to redesign bullets to control expansion.

MattXYZ
August 1, 2007, 12:46 AM
Face it, 9mm is DEAD! Police use is waining greatly, and the military KNOWS its puny. Only in the ghetto does it still reside with its once reputation. The .357SIG IS a +P+9mm, but can shoot them all day long. Its the MOST accurate loading ever, see for yourself. As far as wear, get a SIG Sauer, like my p226. Its built to take that kind of abuse, and does. .357 SIG rules, or at least thats what I think, and this Blackwater junkie told me. At the time this ancient thread was started, .357SIG could of been expensive to shoot, with limited ammo choices. But FF to now, late summer of '07, Its just as cheap as any other. The .357SIG wounds like a .45 in ballistic gel, with a premium hp.

the pistolero
August 1, 2007, 01:24 AM
Oh my gosh, it's the son of Gunkid... ;)

Autolycus
August 1, 2007, 02:43 AM
Oirginally posted by MattXYZ: Face it, 9mm is DEAD! Police use is waining greatly, and the military KNOWS its puny. Only in the ghetto does it still reside with its once reputation. The .357SIG IS a +P+9mm, but can shoot them all day long. Its the MOST accurate loading ever, see for yourself. As far as wear, get a SIG Sauer, like my p226. Its built to take that kind of abuse, and does. .357 SIG rules, or at least thats what I think, and this Blackwater junkie told me. At the time this ancient thread was started, .357SIG could of been expensive to shoot, with limited ammo choices. But FF to now, late summer of '07, Its just as cheap as any other. The .357SIG wounds like a .45 in ballistic gel, with a premium hp.

9mm maybe dead (that is very debatable) but the truth of the matter is this thread was long dead until you brought it back to life.

GJgo
August 2, 2007, 02:40 AM
I tend to look at the debate in more of a "right tool for the right job" fashion. I have a Glock 23 (.40) that is my CCW. 13 rounds. I used to take a SP101 .357 (5 rounds) as my carry weapon when I went up into the mountais for hiking/ fishing/ etc. Traded it in, and got (among other things) a Glock 32 barrel (.357 SIG) so I could swap out with the 23. Now I have basically the same energy potential in the same package size with 13 rounds in my fly vest instead of 5. :) It is by far easier to carry than my 6 shot .41 mag was..

MattXYZ
August 14, 2007, 11:25 PM
Hey somone will read it and maybe learn a thing or two. My P226 .357SIG is almost identical to my .40 barrel as far as flash and noise. The slide operates way faster & snappier, which has awesome follow up, and double-even triple tap advantages. They also have extremely consistent velocity's. I just like the round a lot, probably my favorite. Gets on my nerves when folks compare it to a 9mm+P+, that's all. Its kinda like an extension of the .40 and a good one; like when you get under 135gr, it changes over to .357SIG. Except Pow'rballs, personally I don't care for 135gr .40, the projectile is so short and the expanded HP petals seem to stretch so thin cause of so little material to work with...Though the COR-BON DPX is only 140gr and I love that loading, it is a fine one.:)

41magsnub
August 15, 2007, 01:55 PM
This is only slightly off the topic... balistically how does a .357 sig compare to a .357 magnum? I understand this is an apples to oranges comparision, this is purely academic.

With the limited choices in .357 sig and not being a hand loader my next gun is likely to be an M&P .40 but I am curious how a .357 sig compares to my Security Six in .357 Mag.

Scorpiusdeus
August 15, 2007, 04:33 PM
Face it, 9mm is DEAD! Police use is waining greatly, and the military KNOWS its puny. Only in the ghetto does it still reside with its once reputation.

While I'm not a huge 9mm fan, it's far from dead kid. Sadly a deputy in FL was just killed with one yesterday. I think he'd disagree with you.

I'll confess that I'm kind of a one caliber kind of guy. I prefer to shoot the same caliber and round in practice, as in competition, and day to day carry. I have set myself in on the .40 S&W 165 grain. Only variation is that I practice with White box or winclean and I carry Doubletap HP All .40 S&W 165 gr.

That having been said, I'm being eaten alive in USPSA by 9mm guys as I shoot in production. I have been thinking about using a 9mm for USPSA, but I can't quite bring myself to do it.

Crunker1337
August 15, 2007, 05:59 PM
"This is only slightly off the topic... balistically how does a .357 sig compare to a .357 magnum? I understand this is an apples to oranges comparision, this is purely academic."

.357SIG was actually built to be a .357 Magnum of autopistols, and they say that with the right bullet weight and loading it can arguably achieve that.

I personally think .357SIG is better than .40S&W - much more velocity, almost as much hitting power. Same capacity. Improved penetration.

marley
August 15, 2007, 08:54 PM
I love my g32. It is loud. People do notice. The va state police and the richmond pd both use sigs in .357 sig. I figure I can't go but so wrong with that. Patrick

S&W 910
August 16, 2007, 08:37 PM
The US Secret Service and Air Marshalls use the 357 sig

If the 357 sig is trusted to protect the life of the President and airplane passengers,i trust it to protect mine,its the only round i carry

gp911
August 17, 2007, 02:39 PM
Wow, I'm not much of a 9mm fan, but last I saw it was still chambered in about 10x the firearms .357 Sig is... :scrutiny:

I like the .357 Sig just fine, but I'm betting 9mm will still be more widely available 10 years from now. I'm betting 30 years from now .357 Sig will be about where it is now, in terms of acceptance.


gp911

Scorpiusdeus
August 17, 2007, 03:00 PM
The US Secret Service and Air Marshalls use the 357 sig

If the 357 sig is trusted to protect the life of the President and airplane passengers,i trust it to protect mine,its the only round i carry

How many actual shootings have either service had with this round if you know?

hrgrisso
August 17, 2007, 04:14 PM
I only know of the one crazy guy who got shot by an Air Marshall last year. But I do know that NM State Police switched to Sigs in .357Sig and several local/big city pd's there switched to afterwards. I know that several have changed guns issued but not the caliber.

FWIW I love my 229 in .357Sig.

There was another post talking about guns being chambered for what they were designed for. I agree, unless major re-design work has happened reliability suffers.

FWIW: I love my .357Sig in Sig guns. I've also liked the Glock 32 and 33. I also like 9mm, .40 and .45. Shoot what you shoot well. Practice hard and often.

Oh and 9mm isnt' dead, I couldn't think of anything clever to say about where it was now, but "it's serving America well" only has so much punch. But I think it's enough.

medmo
August 20, 2007, 02:38 AM
The whole idea of the exercise was try to develop a pistol cartridge that fit into a double stack 9mm/40 frame which duplicated the 125gr 357 magnum load. They pretty much achieved that.

I have a 229 in 357 sig and also have a sig bbl. in 40. If you plan on owning both bbl's buy the 357 sig factory gun and then pick up the 40 cal bbl. There are a lot more 40 bbls on the market and they are less expensive.

Having shot the gun a lot with both bbls I found the 357 sig bbl to be significantly more accurate shooting 125gr GDHP then any of the variety of 40 cal bullet weights/brands. I don't think this proves that the 357 sig is more accurate then the 40cal. It just means that the particular 357 sig bbl I have shoots more accurate then the 40 cal bbl.

I'm glad I have both because I can swap out to the 40 bbl when I plan on shooting a lot of factory ammo. I read through all of the threads and noticed a lot of animosity towards the round. The 357sig is definitely not a 9mm +p+. It isn't a 40 cal with a light bullet either. If you plan on owning one and plan of shooting a lot of factory ammo then prepare to shell out a few more bucks or get a 40cal bbl to go with the gun.

gandog56
August 20, 2007, 11:56 PM
I have both 357 Sig and 40 S&W barrels for my Sig P229! I love them both. So I don't have to choose. But I would say this. If you don't reload get the 40. More types of ammo available at the stores and a lot less expensive.

gandog56
August 21, 2007, 12:01 AM
"This is only slightly off the topic... balistically how does a .357 sig compare to a .357 magnum? I understand this is an apples to oranges comparision, this is purely academic."

Allegedly, SIG shied away from calling its new cartridge a nine-millimeter-anything for fear of public rejection of the round. Instead, the new cartridge was dubbed a "357" in order to highlight its purpose: to duplicate the performance of 125-grain .357 Magnum loads fired from 4-inch barrelled revolvers, except in a cartridge designed to be used expressly in an autoloader platform.

jaholder1971
August 21, 2007, 12:02 AM
This is only slightly off the topic... balistically how does a .357 sig compare to a .357 magnum? I understand this is an apples to oranges comparision, this is purely academic.

With the limited choices in .357 sig and not being a hand loader my next gun is likely to be an M&P .40 but I am curious how a .357 sig compares to my Security Six in .357 Mag.

IMHO this is the only comparison that makes sense.

Looking at Brassfetcher's site, comparing .357 125 grain loadings to .357 Sig, the Sigs appear to be within 100 fps of the .357 Magnum using 125 grain bullets.

However, you have to remember that bullet design has a lot to do with the success of the Federal and Remington 125 grain .357 loads. Both used a semijacketed hollowpoint that you'd probably never see on a bullet designed to feed through an automatic. This bullet design allowed for much more framentation/secondary missiles which seems to be no longer in vogue. Nevertheless, it's pretty much a twin.

I know for a fact that a lot of LEO's remember that back in the day, you hit a BG in the chest with a .357 125 grainer he went down more times than not. The load is a benchmark that the gunmakers have been trying to duplicate for 25 years on a semiauto platform and .357 Sig appears to be it.

MassMan
August 25, 2007, 04:56 PM
I agree with Bobarino. Buy the gun with both barrels. In fact you might be able to work a deal on the barrel when you buy it at the same time as the gun. I didn't see much difference in recoil with the 357 sig, but was concerned about the extra wear on the gun. I checked with Sig and was told I could put in a 1lb stronger spring if I was going to shoot "a lot" of 357sig rounds, but for occasional shooting the spring that came in the 40S&W gun was fine. If memory serves me right, the 40S&W has a 15lb spring and the 357sig comes with a 16lb spring, but don't quote me as my memory doesn't serve me as accurately as it once did.

RustyShackelford
August 26, 2007, 04:37 PM
I really like the .357SIG for LE/CC/protection use but from what I know the .40S&W is far more popular. With the growing problem of ammo shortages/production I could see major ammo makers offering fewer .357SIG choices :(.

Maybe if the USA gets out of SW Asia sooner more ammo makers will produce the .357sig loads w/o high prices. :D

Let's hope!

Rusty

M.E.Eldridge
August 26, 2007, 11:23 PM
Do many dealers stock .357 barrels for a Sig 226? I think I'd like to get one and give the .357 a try...

pheasant slayer
August 27, 2007, 12:18 AM
My two cents worth: I prefer the 10mm and never understood the recoil thing. It shoots very nicely in the Glock and outperforms the 40 and 357. The nine mm will kill you with one round or piss you off with 15 rounds. My old Riverside, CA cop buddies used to tell stories of shooting a perp 15 times with their Browning pistols and then struggling to cuff the guy. I would never use a nine mm for protection but Tony Spilotro's boys killed quite a few with .22 rimfires too. Your choice. 10mm rules!

berettashotgun
August 27, 2007, 12:08 PM
I have a much easier time shooting my Beretta 8357 with ranger ammo than the 40 version (8040). WAY EASIER
That said, I have shot over 100k rounds of 45 in my trips around the sun (Colt,Kimber,Para-lover,Wilson, Ruger,S&W owner), and documented 32k thru a single Glock 17.(purchased with a twin and a CASE of 33rd factory mags at wally world:neener: in the day)
Bullet weight has ALWAYS been the deciding factor for me, as in 2nd round recovery and accuracy results, a Para P-12 with 185 gold sabers or a Para P-14 with 230 h.p bullets seems to me to hit about where I'm looking. Ditto with a G17 and 124 bullets.
I'd easily take a 357 with 125 gr over a 40 with 155gr Winchester Ranger in the same handgun- ONLY for shootability reasons.
Either round would certainly put your eye out :evil:
You MUST score a hit to be rewarded with points in this game; style or flash is worthless,, caliber or projectile weight/diameter- pointless!
Being conservative with your money in life or death situations is a direct indicator of how liberal you are with your life.

Richard.Howe
August 27, 2007, 12:45 PM
Hmm...

With factory loads like the Double Tap 9mm +P running 124's at 1310 fps, and 357sig factory stuff on the order of 125's running ~1350fps (e.g. Federal Premium)...

...why would you buy the more expensive, harder-to-find, niche 357sig?

Seems like an awfully expensive and limiting 40 feet per second!

Rich

Scorpiusdeus
August 27, 2007, 01:00 PM
My old Riverside, CA cop buddies used to tell stories of shooting a perp 15 times with their Browning pistols and then struggling to cuff the guy.

Really, which buddies would these be? How many suspects in Riverside county were shot 15 times?

Have any names?

Greg8098
August 28, 2007, 04:53 PM
You hit that right on the head Ricard !!! The DoubleTap 9mm's aren't slouches by any means. I used to own a G31 and G33, but they really don't offer any more performance than 9, 40, 45, and surely not 10mm. They do however make a helluva lot of noise, and are very fun to play with at the range.


Want .357 Magnum performance ??? GET A .357 MAGNUM !!!

Tang419
January 25, 2008, 09:26 PM
I found this topic, searching for updated .357 SIG data. I love shooting the .357 SIG, no super reason behind it, I just prefer it over the .40. That being said, I have a Glock 23, and I just picked up a Glock 32 barrel from OMB for $89. I had a 32 and traded it, and have regretted it ever since. So I thought basically picking up a 2nd Glock for $89 was a good deal. For me, felt recoil is less in the .357, and point of aim is the same, so I can still practice with the .40. I just ordered some Double Tap 147gr .357 SIG ammo, so I can switch to it for carry.

147gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1250fps (4" barrel) - 14.75" / .73"

I think I will feel safe with it on my side.

Jason_G
January 26, 2008, 11:35 AM
I would go with the bigger bullet myself. You get the same capacity and a slightly bigger hole. You shouldn't pay too much attention to the whole kinetic energy thing, either. It simply doesn't matter much- at least not for handgun rounds. Temporary channels with handgun calibers are pretty much just that, at least according to what I've read and seen. Rifle rounds can get into the velocities where the "mush" factor can come into play. If you've already settled on a caliber, then you might want to start looking at the kinetic energy to maximize penetration for that particular bullet, but across the board it's not a major wounding factor when looking at modern handgun loadings for semi autos. Personally, I can't see that the .357 Sig penetrates any better in ballistic gel, so I'd have to assume it'd be a similar case in a badguy's torso. I'd like to see some tests on hard materials like 2x4 studs, car doors, etc., though.

Here:
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e15/itsthewhitmans/jason/Gelatin.jpg



I know it's a resurrected thread, but FWIW, I'd skip the .357 Sig unless it was for fun, and go for the .40 in 180 gr myself. I prefer the .45 though, and if I wanted more umph than that I'd go for the 10mm auto.
YMMV.

Jason

tblt
January 26, 2008, 11:37 AM
My choices
9 mm cheap to shoot.+p for self defence(best all around IMO
40 ?
357 sig harder to find

XD-40 Shooter
January 26, 2008, 11:50 AM
357 sig is just a supercharged 9mm, I'd still rather have the 40. Also, ammo cost will be higher and availability is limited in some areas, for the 357 sig. I would suspect the blast and flash are severe as well, with those bullets screaming at 1400 fps. I would also suspect that reloading the 357 sig might be tricky as well, as it is a bottlenecked cartridge. I'll keep the 40.:p

possum
January 26, 2008, 02:28 PM
i like .40 because it is cheaper, and more condusive to my shooting habits. however .357 sig is a great defense rd that has awesome performace.

i say get the .40 model, and then get the .357 sig conversion barrel and then you will have both and you can decide for yourself.

Lonestar49
January 26, 2008, 03:24 PM
...

Have to agree, would start with either Sig P226 40cal, or Sig P229 Carry 40cal, and with either, get a 357 barrel up the road, then ya have the best of both worlds.


Ls

TacoMalo
January 26, 2008, 03:24 PM
Wow this thread is old! Dec. 24,2003! I love my .357 Sig but it is expensive to shoot.

Grifter116
December 7, 2008, 10:46 PM
If the 9mm were any good pope John Paul would have been dead a lot sooner
(like this thread should have been) Forget the additional inch of penetration, look at the wound cavities in the ballistics gel photo. It appears the .357sig easily surpasses the 9mm for volume; even appearing to be slightly better than the .45acp. - and volume is always better than penetration distance, according to reassurances from my missus:(

sdj
December 7, 2008, 11:17 PM
I prefer the .357 sig to the .40 (that is, I prefer the G32 to the G23). Disclaimer: this is completely a "feel" thing, for me.

BlindJustice
December 8, 2008, 12:20 AM
My $.02

I shoot .45 ACP in a full size 1911, as well as a S&W 625
as well as a CZ 75B 9mm Luger. I've never shot a .40 S&W
but I like the 75B so well I'd problably go with that platform in
.40 S&W if or when I go that route, however, and I'm commenting
here is that the thread title states

.357 Sig or .40 Cal.

Well, that llends itself to one cartridge, the .357 SIg
against every other cartridge that is chambered in .40/10MM.

If I wanted a 10MM/.40 S&W and start accumulating brass
cases, I'd get a S&W 610 revolver and start bagging up brass.

Actually I do have a .40 cal semi-auto. It's my 1911 when I put
the Bar -Sto .400 CorBon barrel in it. The .400 CorBon is like
the .357 SIg in that it is necked down from a slightly tapered cartridge.
Same issues though as .357 SIg, big flash bang but flatter shooting
than some for the caliber.

I like sub sonic for SD.HD for rapid recovery and heavier bullet weights
for momentum. Double Tap 9mm Luger +P with 124 gr. or
147 gr. Gold DOts and more mgazine capacity than the .357 SIg.

I asked a guy behind the counter at the range about .357 SIg and
he said the SIgs they sell in .357 Sig most new owners of whithin a
month are asking about buying a barrel in .40 S&W.

just saying....

Randall

Taurus_9mm
August 18, 2009, 10:21 AM
I love my Taurus PT840 although the .357 Sig round has recently captured my attention. At the moment I'm considering either a Glock 31 or FNP 357 Sig due to the availability of .357 Sig ammo in my area. That and I need an excuse for another handgun. :)

www.gunnerforum.com

kansas coyote
August 18, 2009, 10:34 AM
Alot of misinformation in this thread . I do not have the time or energy to correct it all.
.357 sig is a necked down 40 s&w it is nowhere near the 9mm same case capacity as 40 just a smaller projectile . I think it will be a cartridge that will be a has been at some point . Due to its non adoption by most if any military or leo departments . Also the 40 is nowhere near being a middle cartridge of the 9mm - 45 acp that some people think it is . While being a little less than a 45 is is miles away from the 9mm .

Dr_2_B
August 18, 2009, 11:19 PM
It received pretty good marketing, but I don't think it will receive the lasting use that some others enjoy.

justinvoigts
September 3, 2009, 09:18 PM
LOOK AT THE KINETIC ENERGY FOR THE 357 SIG IT IS LIKE 100 MORE POUNDS OF PRESSURE THAN THE 165 GR 40 S&W IN THE T SERIES I DON'T CARRY THE 357 SIG BUT DO THE 165 GR WHO CARES A 165 GR T SERIES WILL STILL KILL LIKE A 357 SIG T SERIES WILL ITS ALL ABOUT PLACEMENT:banghead:

SingleSeven
September 24, 2009, 05:06 PM
I jumped on the .40 bandwagon in the early 90s with the purchase of a Glock 23. It seemed like a good compromise back then between the capacity of a 9mm and the larger diameter of the 45ACP. But it never really grew on me although I spent many of the years since trying various upgrades (lighter trigger, custom grips, etc.) without a marked improvement. I even ran the spectrum of ammo from 180 gn to 135 gn but nothing changed. The weapon was reliable and reasonably accurate, but it just didn't have the same feel when firing (by that I mean like an extension of my hand) as my 45s or my S&W 686. I've also owned a S&W 4006 and a P226 in .40 but they never really did it for me either. Well a couple of years ago I decided to swap a 357 SIG barrel in the Glock 23 and that made all the difference. I think it might have had to do with the more rapid cycling of the slide or a quicker dissipation of felt recoil, but whatever it was accurate doubletaps became second nature after the swith to 357SIG. I know this recap is anecdotal and doesn't shed any light on the terminal ballistics of the caliber, but I certainly practice more with the 357SIG than I ever did with the .40. It has become my favorite range gun.

Still,
My preferred house gun for self defense is the S&W 686 packed with Federal 125 gn hollowpoints, and if I could only have one auto it would be a 1911 45 ACP, but the weapon I like to shoot the most is my Glock 23 conversion in 357SIG.

HiVelSword
September 25, 2009, 12:18 AM
NOT good qualities in a defensive weapon!

Logically, the better comparison would be 9x19 versus .40 S&W. The 9x19 is consistently delivers the same performance (terminal effectiveness) both in the lab and in actual LE usage as the 357 SIG--and without the negatives associated with the 357 SIG plus an increased capacity. Your looking at about 16 inches of penetration and expansion to approximately .63 calibre with both the 9x19 and 357 SIG. The .40 S&W will deliver about the same penetration and approximately .05 inches more expansion (.68 calibre). As you increase bullet size and mass from 9x19/357 SIG, to .40 S&W more tissue is crushed, resulting in a larger permanent cavity. In addition, the larger bullets often offer better performance through intermediate barriers.
a 125 grain at 1,450 fps duplicates .357 mag combat loads from a 4" revolver. The .357 mag has a LEGENDARY track record for dropping bad guys particularly the 125 grain JHP's.

But a round that emulates it (more or less) while doubling the capacity over a standard revolver is now somehow an inferior choice?

HiVelSword
September 25, 2009, 12:23 AM
Crap. I replied to someone's post from an ancient thread. :o

Thanks, Taurus_9mm! :banghead:

johnnylaw53
September 25, 2009, 07:56 AM
When our sheriff office went to general issued weapons several years ago the sheriff wanted sigs, so a group of deputies was arranged and a rep came down with several sigs for the team to test. I was not on the team but showed up one afternoon and was allow to shoot all the weapons. The team decided on the the 229 in .40 but that sheriff really didn't want any feed back and we ended up with sig pro's in .357 sig. They not bad but I reallly like the beretta that I had in 9mm. I would not get the .357 since i belive that a hot 9mm is almost at the same power level and practice ammo is far cheaper then .357. Between the two we are talking about I would just go with the .40

be safe

Extremely Pro Gun
October 13, 2009, 08:49 PM
So ive got a glock 27 and a sig barrel. I use the sig in my vehicle for the penetration and I use the 40 at home for less penetration and bigger hole.

Ling_650vette
December 25, 2009, 12:22 AM
Alot of misinformation in this thread . I do not have the time or energy to correct it all.
.357 sig is a necked down 40 s&w it is nowhere near the 9mm same case capacity as 40 just a smaller projectile . I think it will be a cartridge that will be a has been at some point . Due to its non adoption by most if any military or leo departments . Also the 40 is nowhere near being a middle cartridge of the 9mm - 45 acp that some people think it is . While being a little less than a 45 is is miles away from the 9mm .

Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, New Mexico and Tennessee and I believe 2-3 other State Trooper agencies = non adoption...then sure, your "facts" are correct.

And losing 2 to 3 rounds = "nowhere near the 9mm same case capacity"? I'll have to remember that next time I break out an M&P40/357 and someone has an M&P9 that they've got "uber pwnage" on me in capacity :rolleyes:

gunslinger720
July 20, 2010, 01:41 PM
I own a Sig P-226 with the 357 sig and the 40S&W Barrels and find them about equil in recoil and thats using HOT 40's and Winchester Rangers in 357 Sig's I think the 357 is slightly more accurate though. I've put both Factory and numerous reloads all very hot just for a comparison. I think each has its good points and do exactly as were intended and besides that for defense any caliber of the Majors not 22's 25's etc. The intruder or attacker wouldn't know what hit him weather or not it was a 40, 357 or a 44 mag and secondly its not the defensive caliber but the placement of the rounds shot 1 hit with a 40 is better than 6 misses with a 44 mag

RiverCity.45
July 21, 2010, 04:12 PM
I wonder what the record for reviving an old thread is. This caliber war started in 2003.

FYI: I have a S&W M&P .40 that I converted to .357 SIG with a drop-in barrel. Love the flexibility.

kerstingm
July 25, 2010, 09:11 PM
I just picked up a P229 for under $600 this weekend at a local local gun show and after shooting
It I liked it far better than my XDM that I previously owned. I picked up the 357 barrel
For another $100 I haven't shot it yet but from what I have read here sounds like I made
Made a good choice.

dom1104
July 25, 2010, 10:48 PM
Here is my thing, if a 9mm bullet going 1450 fps is supposedly, so fantastic, drops bag guys with hits in the extremities <have heard even Massad Ayoob say this as early as last week> ballistic pressure waves, kills water moccasins with near misses in the water, has a 99% stop rate, and every agency that switches to it is 100% totally happy with it..


would that make a 9mm carbine like... the hand of god himself?

I dont buy it.

9mm bullets out of carbine barrels arent killing bad guys left and right, and extra 200 fps out of a pistol isnt going to make it suddenly a magic bullet.

For reference, http://proarmspodcast.com/2010/07/11/055-were-getting-the-band-back-together-to-discuss-the-357sig-cartridge/

Wildkow
August 16, 2010, 01:57 AM
All other criteria between the 9mm, 357 SIG and the .40 S&W being the same or nearly the same wouldn't the reliability of the 357 SIG bottle neck design make it a better choice for the entire spectrum of shooting, i.e. plinkin, Self/Home Defense, Competition or LE? :D

I have all three by the way.

If you enjoyed reading about ".357 SIG vs. 40 cal" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!