9mm +P+ vs .357 Magnum?


PDA






Para-Medic
February 23, 2012, 02:37 PM
I just saw this load that Buffalo bore makes for 9mm: http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=118

A 115 grain 9mm bullet going 1400 fps.


I believe one of the best loads for .357 Magnum is the Federal 357b, a 125 grain .357 (9mm) bullet going 1450 fps.

I know the Federal 357b isn't the most powerful .357 load, but that 9mm load just about equals it, don't it?

Would 10 more grains and 50 fps really make that big a difference? Plus at least 10 more rounds, wouldn't that tip things in the 9mm's favor?

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm +P+ vs .357 Magnum?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rcmodel
February 23, 2012, 02:39 PM
Plus at least 10 more roundsNot unless you plan to miss a lot.

And don't mind beating the snot out of your pistol shooing +P+ in it.

rc

Para-Medic
February 23, 2012, 02:47 PM
Not unless you plan to miss a lot.

And don't mind beating the snot out of your pistol shooing +P+ in it.

rc
____


I would only shoot a few boxes to make sure it works in my gun, rest of the time it'd just be for carry.

jon86
February 23, 2012, 02:51 PM
Sure that particular round is going fast, but do you need it to be? What is the quality of that hollowpoint? I think buffalo bore has some great wadcutter loads and hardcast loads, but for 9mm, I'll stick with a quality hollowpoint that has a lot of tests done with it, like a Speer Gold Dot or Federal HST, for example. These are usually cheaper too. YMMV.

NG VI
February 23, 2012, 02:53 PM
Eh, there's a lot more to terminal ballistics than pure velocity-energy numbers, and there are many advantages to a well designed heavy for caliber bullet in a service pistol.

In this case it appears they are loading it with Gold Dots, so that's a big + for the load, but really for the cost, I'd rather buy 50 rounds of either 124+P Gold Dots or HST, or 147/147+P Gold Dots, HST, or Ranger-T.

Penetration is determined in large part by momentum and surface area of the front of the bullet, heavyweight bullets get more of their momentum from mass, which is a near constant unlike velocity, so they tend to penetrate better even with the same amount of expansion, and penetrate the same distance more reliably because their momentum is less influenced by external factors.

The lightweight bullets, and especially all of the fragile, extra-high velocity lightweights loaded by companies like Cor-Bon and Double Tap, have delivered some pretty dramatic results before, but they are much more erratic performers and the heavyweights have it in spades over them in consistency. Personally I'd rather buy defensive ammunition with the expectation that it will perform nearly the same way every time and give me the best measurable, objective results, while saving me some money in the process, over buying loads that are known for delivering unpredictable performance and that cost much more.

The 'law enforcement' boxes of Speer Gold Dot, current production Winchester Ranger, especially the non-bonded Ranger-T, and Federal's HST are the best things going for defensive ammunition these days. They cost barely more, sometimes less, than the smaller 'personal defense' boxes of ammunition, they deliver outstanding expansion, they are consistent over the widest range of velocities, and they work better than the velocity-dependent lightweights out of short barreled guns.

AK103K
February 23, 2012, 03:01 PM
Would 10 more grains and 50 fps really make that big a difference?
Nope.



Not unless you plan to miss a lot.

And don't mind beating the snot out of your pistol shooing +P+ in it.
Ive got a boat load of 127 grain +P+ 9mm through one of my Glock 17's, and its not near as beat up as my 31 (357SIG) was with less rounds through it, and it was supposedly made to handle the hotter round.

I dont plan on missing a lot either. :)

My 26 holds 10 rounds, my 60, 5. I can shoot my 26 a LOT better using full power loads, and my hit probability is a lot higher both near and far, and usually, my hits on target at 15 yards with the 26 are better than my hits on target at 7 with the 60.

Id also prefer to have rounds left over when its over, than to come up even just one short.

Gryffydd
February 23, 2012, 03:55 PM
Not unless you plan to miss a lot.
Given the statistics on defensive shootings, that'd probably be a realistic plan.
And that's without even considering multiple targets etc.

bigfatdave
February 23, 2012, 04:24 PM
don't get hung up on magic bullets or buzzwords

that .357 is probably an advertised velocity from a barrel too long to carry comfortably
for that matter, how long is the barrel on Buffalo Bore's test gun? (I'm impressed at their policy of using actual gun velocities)
... ... meh, those are still duty-sized guns, the G19 barely qualifying as a compact as far as I'm concerned
plus it will likely beat the crap out of your gun, +P+ means it exceeds the high end of the +P range ... and doesn't tell you a damn thing beyond that

Certaindeaf
February 23, 2012, 05:14 PM
I think that's called the Skinner load.. your rabbit's already skinned.

19-3Ben
February 23, 2012, 05:21 PM
OP- You are comparing Buffalo Bore's 9mm with a mass-manufacturer's .357mag. If you want a fair comparison, compare apples to apples and give both loads from the same manufacturer.

Compare that 115gr. 9mm +p+ at 1400fps from Buffalo Bore, to their 125gr. .357mag load that makes 1600fps from a 4" bbl revolver.

So we're talking about 10 grains heavier, and 200fps faster. That makes a big difference in the overall power level of a round, IMHO.

That being said, I don't see that .357mag load as being all that desireable of an SD load for several reasons. BUT, it is certainly significantly hotter than the 9mm+p+.

2zulu1
February 23, 2012, 05:24 PM
Sticking with Buffalo Bore, they're getting 1400fps with 158gr JHPs from a 3" J-frame.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=100

Not my choice to carry but it's a heads up comparison between the two calibers from the same ammunition manufacturer. :)

Zombiphobia
February 23, 2012, 05:43 PM
I've fired the 124gr +P+ from Buffalo bore in my 92FS. Accuracy wasn't worth squat.

The extra oomph in this particular cartridge is counter-productive. IF you can make it contact your organic target, I'm sure it'll make a mess. But that's a big IF, according to my experience.

I'd rather KNOW I can hit my target, rather than hope it makes a mess of them IF I can hit them.

The Lone Haranguer
February 23, 2012, 09:34 PM
Sticking with Buffalo Bore, they're getting 1400fps with 158gr JHPs from a 3" J-frame.
Out of that little thing? :eek: Forget about the gun wearing out, worry about your hand.

CriminalJustice
February 23, 2012, 10:41 PM
Any tests showing how far these are supposed to penetrate in ballistics gel?

I'll stick with 147g RA9T's and HST's in my 9's for rapid follow up shots and consistent expansion with proven hollow points.

Pyro
February 23, 2012, 10:43 PM
Didn't they make 38 Super to replicate .357 performance in an auto-loader?

mljdeckard
February 23, 2012, 10:45 PM
Here's how I look at it. They're both the same diameter, they will both most likely traverse a human target. Either one is fine with me.

19-3Ben
February 23, 2012, 11:41 PM
Didn't they make 38 Super to replicate .357 performance in an auto-loader?

If that were the case, it would be a really neat trick. 38 Super came out in 1929 IIRC, and .357mag came out in 1934.

Out of that little thing? Forget about the gun wearing out, worry about your hand.

I used to shoot the Double Tap equivalent of that load in my 3" SP101. Same ballistics. it was... spirited. that being said, a 3" SP101 stoked with that load makes one heck of a trail gun.

2zulu1
February 24, 2012, 02:11 AM
Didn't they make 38 Super to replicate .357 performance in an auto-loader?
Super hit the market first and was known for its ability to penetrate auto bodies and body armor of the time, going in the front and out the back.

When the mag was first introduced it was a high pressure caliber, 158gr lead round nose at 1600fps that created serious leading issues.

FWIW, there was a patrolman who started his career during WWII and he carried that ammo in single belt loops for his old Smith; I was a rookie in the early 70s and felt grateful for speedloaders. :)

I also load the 125gr XTP @1491fps through a Colt 1911 Government in 38 Super, a 357mag bullet at factory 357mag velocities, huge difference in performance between it and the 9mm 115gr +p+ Ranger and Gold Dots.

Certaindeaf
February 24, 2012, 02:30 AM
You need a .44 minimum. Them groundhogs have neck armor!

bigfatdave
February 24, 2012, 04:20 PM
Didn't they make 38 Super to replicate .357 performance in an auto-loader?

That's .357SIG, a necked-down .40s&w casing that sort of almost replicated one particular .357mag load form a given barrel length

Certaindeaf
February 24, 2012, 04:48 PM
The .38 super was a 130 at 1300. Pretty easy to remember. Then they loaded +p's for it. Now, it'll hardly get out of the barrel. anyway

jmr40
February 24, 2012, 04:51 PM
My Glock 19 shoots +p 124 gr bullets at a chronographed 1250 fps. While lots of 357 mag ammo is advertised at 1400-1500 fps, that is from 8" test barrels with no cylinder gap. Shoot that same ammo through a real gun with a 4" barrel and you MIGHT get 1300 fps. Shoot it from a revolver shorter than 4" and +P 9mm beats it.

A 357 revolver is most useful with longer barrels and heavier 158-180 gr. bullets that a 9mm cannot handle. For self defense against humans I'll take a 9mm every time. For woods carry where 4 legged predators are a concern I'll take a 10mm pistol, but a good 357 with the right ammo is a close 2nd place.

conhntr
February 24, 2012, 09:41 PM
Jmr check the buffalo bore loads we are talking about:

357 mag
3"inch S&W J frame
158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1398 fps

You can chrono bbores loads but people have and their advertised velocities are accurate


So a 34gr heavier bullet at 150fps faster out of a barrel 1 inch shorter. A 9mm IS NOT a 357. That said i personally can not hit well with a DA revolver and shoot single action autos. That doesnt mean that i pretend a 9mm is as powerful as a 357



You can do your own testing but people already have and buffalo bpres numbers are routable

KodiakBeer
February 24, 2012, 09:58 PM
.38/.357/9mm/.357 Sig/.38 Super - what else? In some loads/bullet weights/barrel lengths all these rounds will overlap at the high or the low end.

What platform do you shoot best? What platform conceals well? When you know the answer to those two questions, then start worrying about which load to use in your chosen platform.

DevilDog0402
February 24, 2012, 10:06 PM
Didn't they make .357 Sig to replicate .357 performance in an auto-loader?

fixed it for you ;)

Jaymo
February 25, 2012, 12:47 AM
I like 115 and 124 grain Gold Dot and 115 grain Cor Bon in my 9s. I haven't been impressed with the 147 grain loads. Especially the subsonic loads.

wnycollector
February 25, 2012, 01:23 PM
I have carried the Federal +P+ 115gr JHP (9BPLE) in my 9mm pistols for years. I carried it because it was accurate, inexpensive and had a LONG track record of stopping bad people from doing bad things. I recently picked up a 500 round case of Winchester Ranger 127gr +P+ T-Series (RA9TA) for a great price ($210 otd) at a gun show. I will be running it through my pistols to see if it will be my new CCW load. As far as the .357 goes, I carry the Federal Hi-Shok 125gr (357B) in my M28. If I get a chance next weekend, I will chrono the RA9TA and the 357B loading and post the data.

Certaindeaf
February 25, 2012, 02:02 PM
^
Excellent.

2ndamd
February 25, 2012, 02:21 PM
I have both and the Federal .357 mag load does 1450~ out of a 4" brl GP100.
The same load has ~1210 fps out of a 2.25" SP101.

The 127 grn +P+ 9mm does 1220~ out of a G19.
The G19 is about the same size as the SP101 2.25" and holds triple the rounds.

Now you put those 357 mags in a 16" Marlin and we are talking some serious business! But, that is the trick with the 357 mag. It has slow buring powder to increase velocity and needs the long barrels to reach its potential. Otherwise, a short barrel 357 mag makes a loud boom and blinding flash.

Like others have said, I can control the G26/G19 better with the +p+ rounds than I can the snubbie with magnum loads.

When short brls come to play the 9mm (with the right loading:edit) will actually beat the 357 magnum EEK!
Oh no he didn't!
LOL

Certaindeaf
February 25, 2012, 02:27 PM
^
Very good.
A 9 carbine is not to be short shrifted either.

2zulu1
February 25, 2012, 09:15 PM
My Glock 19 shoots +p 124 gr bullets at a chronographed 1250 fps. While lots of 357 mag ammo is advertised at 1400-1500 fps, that is from 8" test barrels with no cylinder gap. Shoot that same ammo through a real gun with a 4" barrel and you MIGHT get 1300 fps. Shoot it from a revolver shorter than 4" and +P 9mm beats it.

A 357 revolver is most useful with longer barrels and heavier 158-180 gr. bullets that a 9mm cannot handle. For self defense against humans I'll take a 9mm every time. For woods carry where 4 legged predators are a concern I'll take a 10mm pistol, but a good 357 with the right ammo is a close 2nd place.
I see this written on the internet; however, Remington 125gr SJHP exceeded 1450fps out of a 4" Dan Wesson and 1626fps through a 6" M686.

I handloaded some 140gr SJHPs into the low 1500s and that may be one of the best personal defense combinations I've tested with relatively mild recoil. :)

Ben86
February 25, 2012, 09:49 PM
Hot 9mm loads, and cost, have kept me from getting .357 sig. 9mm is just so adaptable and practical. I don't really feel like .357 mag has much more to offer either as a defensive load. Perhaps for hunting, but then there's 44 mag.

I don't care much if my 9mm carry ammo is +P or not. The extra bit of velocity is not needed for expansion. The modern hollowpoints of today are designed to work at a wide range of velocities. So that extra 50 fps you get with +P doesn't mean you get a proportional amount of extra expansion.

DevilDog0402
February 25, 2012, 10:46 PM
So that extra 50 fps you get with +P doesn't mean you get a proportional amount of extra expansion.

Correct, but it may get you little more penetration...


Wishful thinking?

Zombiphobia
February 25, 2012, 11:23 PM
when the zombies come and only quick head-shots count, I want 9mm

NG VI
February 25, 2012, 11:27 PM
Best thing about a +P load to me is the added functional reliability.

2ndamd
February 25, 2012, 11:52 PM
2zulu1: i too, find that a 4" brl or more is needed for the 357 mag to make strides an. d blow away the 9mm.
But, with short brls (2.25" or less) the 9mm proves to be better suited for ccw and control.

I do not find the 357 mag difficult to conttol.
But the flash is distracting for follow-up shots.
Now if we get to a 3" brl kahr or lc9?.
Test show a 147 grn load superior to light and fast loadings in 9mm.

Know your loads guys.
A 45 is not great with ball ammo vs a 9mm with +p jhp.

qcsmitty
February 25, 2012, 11:57 PM
Target reacquisition is key.

qcsmitty
February 26, 2012, 12:01 AM
Any tests showing how far these are supposed to penetrate in ballistics gel?

I'll stick with 147g RA9T's and HST's in my 9's for rapid follow up shots and consistent expansion with proven hollow points.

This.;)

silvermane_1
February 26, 2012, 05:18 AM
if im correct the 38 super was the the 38 special in a autoloader.

KodiakBeer
February 26, 2012, 02:31 PM
if im correct the 38 super was the the 38 special in a autoloader.

You are not correct.

bigfatdave
February 26, 2012, 08:51 PM
if im correct the 38 super was the the 38 special in a autoloader. nope.
The .38super is descended from the .38ACP (a.k.a .38 Auto)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38_Super
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38_ACP

Ben86
February 26, 2012, 11:51 PM
if im correct the 38 super was the the 38 special in a autoloader.

No.

The .38 super is more like .357 sig in performance, while the .38 special is not much more powerful than .380.

Certaindeaf
February 26, 2012, 11:56 PM
^
I think you meant the .25.

Ben86
February 28, 2012, 10:21 PM
I think you meant the .25.

What? With a whopping 60 or so foot pounds energy? No, .38 sp isn't that weak.

gym
February 28, 2012, 10:44 PM
I run the 100 grain powerball @1350 in my glock 26. That's about the same as you were referring to, it's actually 2 grains lighter than my 380 golden sabre ammo in my ruger. But I have a seperate mag loaded up with FMJ 124 or 5 grain rounds. In case I need penetration, in a g19 mag, and a third with 147 g hollow points, whatever the situation, calls for. Same with my 40, Hornaday 165 red tip,wwb 180 fmj, and low recoil 135 Winchester. can't have enough selection. 3 mags is perfect. My 45 is one hydrashock in 230, and one 230 fmj.
Range ammo is plain heavy federal or wwb in FMJ. All guns tested with all ammo I use for full reliability.

R.W.Dale
March 1, 2012, 08:35 PM
Not unless you plan to miss a lot.

And don't mind beating the snot out of your pistol shooing +P+ in it.

rc

It just depends on what you shoot.

Honestly my glock 34 probably digests +p+ much better than my s&w 60 does full house magnums

Given the rise of "active shooter" incidents I'm not going to discount the usefulness of being able to lay down some covering fire.

I carry wheelies and a g34 depending on my mood honestly researching the subject and chronoing 357 non boutique defense loads 9mm +p+ is the equivalent to the watered down 357 mag we get today.

There's lots and lots of 125g 357 loads that struggle to break 1300 in a service sized revolver. Much less a snubbie

posted via tapatalk using android.

paul105
March 2, 2012, 01:29 PM
Here are a few more data points -- actual chrono data.

9mm
4” FNX 9mm ……CorBon 115gr JHP +p…………1,318 fps (Mfg Claimed 1,350 fps)
3.8”CZ P01………Buf Bore 147gr JHP +p………..1,115 fps (Mfg Claimed 1,175 fps)
3.8”CZ Po1………Win Ranger 127 JHP +p+……..1,209 fps (Mfg Claimed 1,250 fps)
3.5” Kahr CW9…….Win Ranger 127 JHP +p+…….1,190 fps (Mfg Claimed 1,250 fps)

357 Mag
1 7/8” S&W 340PD….Fed 130gr Hyd Shok 357 mag…..1,159 fps (Mfg Claimed 1,410fps)
1 7/8” S&W 340PD….Handload 158gr CSWC 13.5g A2400 357 mag…..1,075 fps
1 7/8” S&W 340PD….Handload 158gr HXTP HP 13.5g A2400 357 mag…..1,009 fps
1 7/8” S&W 340PD….Handload 185gr LFNGC 14.7g LilGun 357 mag…..1,007 fps
Yes, 185gr not a typo.

hariph creek
March 2, 2012, 02:35 PM
I have developed a formula for determining which is better, in the 9mm+p+ vs. .357mag debate.
It works as follows:

-If you have or prefer a .357 revolver. Then .357 mag is better. You get versatility and what is to some, a superior platform.

-If you have or prefer a 9mm semi-auto. Then 9mm+p+ is better. You get increased capacity and what is to some, a superior platform.

Of course, if you have one of each. Which ever one you have at hand, is best.


Yes, there are revolvers that chamber 9mm.
Yes, there are autos that chamber .357mag.
These are options that are best not taken into account in this question. Clearly, the only way to solve this would be to:

-Shoot each foot with each cartridge/platform.

-Determine which hurts worse.

-Post it online, for the edification of all interested parties.

hariph creek
March 2, 2012, 03:00 PM
I thought Buffalo Bore switched hollow points, during the ammo shortage a few years ago? Aren't they using Montana Gold hollow points now?

I agree, comparing a BB 9mm load to a Federal .357 load is unbalanced.

If I have any one favorite round it's .357mag. It's versatility includes the ability to use .38 special (Secretly, just between you and me, .38 special is actually my favorite. It's just not very manly to admit.).
However, for any barrel shorter than 4". I'd prefer .38 over .357.
I can handle .357 snubs fine but, it just seems like more flash and boom, than actual worthwhile performance.

2zulu1
March 2, 2012, 04:47 PM
2zulu1: i too, find that a 4" brl or more is needed for the 357 mag to make strides an. d blow away the 9mm.
But, with short brls (2.25" or less) the 9mm proves to be better suited for ccw and control.

I do not find the 357 mag difficult to conttol.
But the flash is distracting for follow-up shots.
Now if we get to a 3" brl kahr or lc9?.
Test show a 147 grn load superior to light and fast loadings in 9mm.

Know your loads guys.
A 45 is not great with ball ammo vs a 9mm with +p jhp.
You bring up some very valid points and I've never bought into the short barrel, alloy framed 357mag platform; but then, you won't find me carrying a G26 either.

My needs are different than most everyone else who are members of website forums, actually, I wish there was a forum for us 'country' folk to share and post our experiences and needs, what works and doesn't work.

Some personal observations, as much as I like carrying a Government 1911/38 Super in rural environments, there are times times, like today, that a M686+/6"
in a shoulder rig setup gets the nod. On multiple targets, I can match the speed of the 686 with a G17, but I can't match the precision accuracy of the 686.

A serious drawback of compact pistols and snub revolvers is their ability to engage multiple, fast moving targets accurately. Very few people have extensive professional training to carry a revolver or put in the the range time to be efficient with one and I have a feeling that many who carry a snub or compact pistol don't fall into the extensive training category.

Training is expensive with the minimum base round count in the 1000-1500 range, including 400-500 with your carry ammo. There's a standard to buck up to if one chooses to carry just as there's a standard for bullet selection. While both calibers may shoot the same 124/125gr bullet weights, bullet design and construction between the two calibers is different. The mag design doesn't need reliable feed ramp construction and many of the mag's bullets are designed with exposed lead that are known for consistent expansion. JHPs can and do clog, some petals may fold back, if some don't fold back the bullet may tumble thus limiting its penetration and reducing its crush cavity volume. XTPs expand reliably, but so do the mag's JSP designs. While the 125gr JSPs don't expand as wide as their 125gr SJHP/JHP counterparts, they penetrate slightly deeper and will do so through light intermediate
barriers, including heavy clothing constructed of down, thinsulate and leather to name a few.

The only snub/short length barrel revolvers I own are in 327mag, 38 Special and 44 Special. Out of a 327mag/2.5" snub (6 shot 21oz), Speer's 115gr Gold Dot (sectional density of the 357/140) @1371fps expands over a 1/2" and penetrates ~15" of soft tissue; heads up (or better) than the 127gr +P+ on a good day.

Just a few observations, if I want magnum performance in a pocket carry wheelgun, I go 327 because it's easier on the hands than the 357; but I also realize I compromise distance by doing so, as it is with any short barrel pistol/revolver.

FWIW, when I carry 9mm, G17 - 127 +P+, Browning Hi-Power - 124gr +P GD; 2nd magazine with both is 147gr bonded or HST.

memphisjim
March 2, 2012, 05:08 PM
I'm a 9mm guy but 9mm is closer to 380acp than hot 357mag

Jath
March 2, 2012, 07:38 PM
I'm tired of reading posts from people who have never taken a physics class, let alone done any actual testing work or calculations regarding terminal ballistics.

We should make a rule that if you haven't so much as taken a college physics class, or are newer than a year into guns, you shouldn't pass off your terminal ballistics OPINION as fact.

2zulu1
March 3, 2012, 06:09 PM
I'm tired of reading posts from people who have never taken a physics class, let alone done any actual testing work or calculations regarding terminal ballistics.

We should make a rule that if you haven't so much as taken a college physics class, or are newer than a year into guns, you shouldn't pass off your terminal ballistics OPINION as fact.
So, since you have taken a college physics class, why not teach us about fluid dynamics and why the momentum model is better for comparing service calibers than the kinetic energy model??? :)

Jath
March 3, 2012, 06:39 PM
Paul, how long was your revolver's barrel? how about the auto's?

Jath
March 3, 2012, 06:41 PM
So, since you have taken a college physics class, why not teach us about fluid dynamics and why the momentum model is better for comparing service calibers than the kinetic energy model??? :)
I can actually show you examples of this not being the case.

paul105
March 3, 2012, 10:06 PM
Jath,

Barrel length is shown at the beginning of each row of data. The revolver was 1 7/8" -- the semi autos were 3.5", 3.8" and 4.0".

Paul

R.W.Dale
March 3, 2012, 10:09 PM
Jath,

Barrel length is shown at the beginning of each row of data. The revolver barrel length was 1 7/8" -- barrel lengths for the semi autos were 3.5", 3.8" and 4.0".

Paul

Also bear in mind that given bbl length for a revolver cannot be directly compared to an automatic.

On a wheel gun the bbl length is measured from the cylinder face forward. On an automatic you measure to the breach face.

Measured the same way as an autoloader bbl a 2" snubbie revolver will actually have an effective barrel length of closer to 4"

posted via tapatalk using android.

NG VI
March 3, 2012, 10:20 PM
The gap on a revolver doesn't bleed off as much velocity as you'd think, either. I think the common rule of thumb of 50 feet per second is probably high except for the sloppiest of cylinder gaps.

2zulu1
March 3, 2012, 10:50 PM
I can actually show you examples of this not being the case.
Well, let's put your college physics to work so that you can share your formulas showing us the effectiveness of KE as it relates to terminal ballistics between the 10mm, 9mm +P+, 357SIG and 357 mag.

Tim37
March 3, 2012, 11:26 PM
just a question to throw some fuel on this fire.

i happen to have a ruger blackhawk convertable 357/9mm with a 6" barrel. im asking this because after this thread i honestly dont know any more. How much stouter would if any a standard 357mag be over a 9mm +p+?

Waywatcher
March 3, 2012, 11:31 PM
Lightweight screamers, although very effective, are not really the .357 cartridge's strong suit in my opinion.

The cartridge really struts its stuff launching 158 grain hardcast wide meplat SWCs at 1250+fps, or 180 grain hardcast wide meplat bullets at 1150+fps. No autoloader can load bullets with such high sectional densities at such high velocities, especially with such bullet shapes.

paul105
March 3, 2012, 11:43 PM
Some perspective on .357 mag and barrel length -- actual chron at 5 long paces from the muzzle

Blue Dot Load -- Alliant Max w/158gr GD 10.2gr

Marlin 18" ,158 gr LRNFP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1482.5 fps
Marlin 18" ,158 gr RJHP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1405.5 fps
Ruger BH 6.5" ,158 gr LRNFP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1272.5 fps
Ruger BH 6.5" ,158 gr RJHP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1225 fps
Ruger SP101 3" ,158 gr LRNFP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1171
S&W M60 3" ,158 gr LRNFP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1166
Ruger SP101 3" ,158 gr RJHP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1139.5 fps
S&W M60 3" ,158 gr RJHP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1129 fps
S&W M360 Ti 1.9" ,158 gr LRNFP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 1019.5 fps
S&W M360 Ti 1.9" ,158 gr RJHP, 9.6gr Blue Dot, 945.5 fps


Lil Gun -- Hodgdon max w/180gr Nos Part - 15.0gr

Marlin 18" ,185 gr LFNGC, 14.7gr Lil'Gun, 1713 fps
Ruger BH 6.5" ,185 gr LFNGC, 14.7gr Lil'Gun, 1388 fps
S&W M60 3" ,185 gr LFNGC, 14.7gr Lil'Gun, 1175 fps
Ruger SP101 3" ,185 gr LFNGC, 14.7gr Lil'Gun, 1161 fps
S&W M360 Ti 1.9" ,185 gr LFNGC, 14.7gr Lil'Gun, 1023

Paul

wanderinwalker
March 4, 2012, 09:41 AM
just a question to throw some fuel on this fire.

i happen to have a ruger blackhawk convertable 357/9mm with a 6" barrel. im asking this because after this thread i honestly dont know any more. How much stouter would if any a standard 357mag be over a 9mm +p+?

See paul105's chrony numbers. It's not a question and it's not throwing fuel on the fire. The .357 IS hands-down, far more potent than the 9mm, even in +P+ trim.

The only reason you can consider a 9mm to be equal to a .357 would be to use the lightweight bullets and throw the .357s out of a 2" snub revolver. Even then, as paul105's numbers show, a 2" .357 is not just "a loud .38 +P", as some would have you believe.

Then again, the 9mm doesn't seem to be terribly affected going from a 4.5" barrel to a 3.5" barrel either. My own chronograph results with a Glock 26 and 17 registered the shorter barrel at a whopping 60-fps slow with most loads. And I will never argue the fact that the 9mm is much more shooter friendly than a stout .357.

I have two .357s and two 9mms and consider myself well armed with either cartridge. It really comes down to what you think you need the handgun to do. If it's for woods work with medium game possibly on the table, give me the .357 and some good 158gr Magnums. If it's for concealing in town, I'll take the Glock 26. If it's for sitting on the night stand, it has to be one of each. ;)

amd6547
March 4, 2012, 04:33 PM
I have been a fan of the 9mm for a long time.
My current favorite is the Glock 26. I shoot it well, and it has been 100% reliable. My load of choice for carry is the Ranger 127gn +P+...it is accurate, and I feel well armed with the combination.
I am also a fan of S&W K frame revolver, and my favorite is a 2.5" Model 19 357 mag. This is my HD handgun of choice.
My club has 10" hanging steel plates at 40yds. I shoot them with both the above handguns.
With the G26, a solid hit results in a "ping" and the plate swinging slightly.
Using the Model 19 and Blazer Brass 158gn 357 mag JHP, a hit gives a loud smack, and the plate really moves...
Neither performance inspires me to think that one round is superior to the other for self defense. In fact, I feel well armed with a decent 38special load.
But there is no doubt in my mind that the 357 mag has power to spare that the 9mm can only dream of.

481
March 4, 2012, 06:07 PM
I'm tired of reading posts from people who have never taken a physics class, let alone done any actual testing work or calculations regarding terminal ballistics.

So am I.

Do you have an advanced degree in physics or direct professional experience in related research that would cause us to take your opinions as statements of fact?

We should make a rule that if you haven't so much as taken a college physics class, or are newer than a year into guns, you shouldn't pass off your terminal ballistics OPINION as fact.

So, let me get this straight...

You are suggesting that the level of education that is required "pass off your terminal ballistics OPINION as fact" is one college level physics class or at least one year of shooting experience?

Dean1818
March 4, 2012, 06:54 PM
So my SP101 3' 357 should be tossed?

amd6547
March 4, 2012, 08:00 PM
No, but it is time to toss this thread, which has become a squirt contest between two people who may be physics gods in their own minds and who probably never fired either caliber.

jimniowa
March 4, 2012, 08:32 PM
I will jump into this thread and state that a 158g jfp or 158g hard cast bullet when properly loaded will break a engine block enableling it if successfuly entering the compartment. It will give the user a thrill as do all heavy loads in a 4" .357. Mine is a Colt Trooper MK lll our bedside gun.
In autoloader the 9mm has been around longer than the .45acp. I have both and the 9mm is for fire power, 15 rd mags. My go to is a .44sp,.44mag, .45acp for carry guns. I carry a Kimber 3" .45 acp auto, back up a .44sp revolver, as I find the .357 mag a awsome weapon with a +p load, both the .44sp and the .45acp may not break engine blocks, but they will put out the opposition quickly.
Jim

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm +P+ vs .357 Magnum?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!