9mm VS. 357 Sig. FOR HOME/SELF DEFENSE?


PDA






Preacher.
December 7, 2012, 11:26 PM
Ok guys, this may start a huge debate but I'm gonna ask it. Is there any benefits in your opinion to having a. 357 Sig instead of a 9mm for personal carry or home defense. I was considering a 9mm for personal carry but then started looking at the. 357 sig. Any comments? Any pros or cons? What do you prefer, and why?? Thanks!!

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm VS. 357 Sig. FOR HOME/SELF DEFENSE?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
highlander 5
December 7, 2012, 11:32 PM
Though the 357 SIG is a faster round thus more muzzle energy I don't trust bottle neck cartridges in a semi auto pistol for SD,i'd take the 9 mm first.

Certaindeaf
December 7, 2012, 11:34 PM
Can you shoot well? It takes some trigger time to shoot well. The Sig ammo costs much more than the 9mm. In my opinion, either will do the job.

powder
December 7, 2012, 11:35 PM
On a budget the 9mm.

For superior penetration works in vehicle contacts, it's the .357 SIG all the way.

rcmodel
December 7, 2012, 11:36 PM
None that I can think of.

9mm SD ammo gets the lions share of R&D money from the manufactures, and the bullets are usually about one generation ahead of what is in the average .357 SIG load..

All a .357 SIG will do for you anyway is make practice ammo cost prohibitive, reduce your mag capacity by a few rounds, and make you drive further to find it on a shelf somewhere.

That, and a lot more flash & muzzle blast in your bedroom at 0-Dark-30 if you ever have to really use it.

On a positive note, bottleneck cartridges feed much better & reliably in an auto pistol.
But 9mm pistols were perfected as far as feeding goes before either of us were born.
And I'm nearly 70.

rc

56hawk
December 7, 2012, 11:39 PM
Personally I would say go 9mm or 40 S&W. 40 pretty much does the same thing as the 357 Sig without any of the drawbacks. 9mm holds marginally more ammo, and 40 S&W does marginally more damage. For a carry gun it depends on how big of a gun you are willing to carry. Full size I would go with 40 or 357, subcompact I would go with a 9mm.

Kayaker 1960
December 7, 2012, 11:44 PM
The .357 Sig will be deafeningly loud if you ever need to use it inside the house. For carry, a nice little 9mm, for in the house I like .45

J_McLeod
December 7, 2012, 11:45 PM
9mm, for the cost factor. If you want both, I think that with a Glock or XD you can buy a 40 cal and then the parts to make it .357 Sig or 9mm.

Skribs
December 7, 2012, 11:55 PM
I'm going to vote 9mm as well. It's what I carry. A .357 sig defense round will likely penetrate slightly farther and expand slightly wider, but not by enough to matter. In the meantime, you get a greater expense, less capacity, greater recoil, more difficult reloading (talking about handloading not mag changes), and greater noise.

The big advantage for the .357 sig over 9mm is the potential for barrier penetration, but I don't think that's a big factor for the average civilian. I carry a 9, and I trust it will be more than adequate.

WinThePennant
December 7, 2012, 11:55 PM
For home defense, go with a subsonic round with a suppressed pistol.

In other words, go with 9mm or .45 with a can.

481
December 8, 2012, 12:04 AM
In the real world, I doubt that there is much difference between the two in terms of effectiveness so I'd go with the 9mm for its lesser muzzle blast and affordable ammo. Plenty of good SD ammo for the 9mm.

Rubber_Duck
December 8, 2012, 12:06 AM
9mm. Being able to practice more with the cheaper round is more important than the extra cuople hundred feet per second offered by the .357 SIG.

4thHorseman
December 8, 2012, 01:23 AM
as mentioned by anothe rposter, the 357 is a load son of a gun...pardon the pun. It will hurt badly even in an outside area without walls. You made be bad a$$ enough for the noise issue, but is your loved ones prepared to suffer hearing damage for life?

Texan Scott
December 8, 2012, 01:25 AM
Just between you, me, and the fencepost, if you ever find that 15 9mm won't do it, you won't need 15 sigs.... you'll need an AK, or a drum-fed shotgun.

TheReiver
December 8, 2012, 01:35 AM
I don't have nearly the experience of most of my fellow THR members but here's my take:

I've tried every one of the "service calibers" in a variety of platforms. The 9x19 is, for ME, the best choice for the following reasons:

1. Highest capacity assuming similarly sized sidearms
2. Less perceived recoil (to me)
3. Lowest cost

Mag capacity is important as accuracy tends to tank when adrenaline is pumping. Lower recoil pulse equals faster additional shots (for me). Lower cost equals more training which is absolutely never a bad thing.

The .357 SIG is more powerful without doubt, but I have never once felt inadequately equipped with anything in 9x19.

Good luck with your choice and no matter what you get train, train, train and then train some more. Safe shooting!

gunnutery
December 8, 2012, 03:41 AM
I would prefer a .357 sig, but my budget dictates otherwise. Therefore I'm transitioning back to 9mm (when I say "back to" I'm actually moving FROM .357MAG and .40S&W). I haven't switched my CCW from my .357mag revolver yet, but when I do it'll be a Glock 26 or 27 with a conversion barrel for practice in 9mm.

I really like the power of .357mag but would like to transition to an auto for CCW for increased capacity. I like that the .357sig round almost mimics the ballistics of the magnum round, however the added cost for a few hundred extra FPS can't make me justify buying into a whole new caliber. Especially when the 9mm can still do the job.

If your budget is such that you can easily afford the .357sig rounds and you want the extra power, go for it. But if you're one who's budget fluctuates or is usually favoring varied needs, go for the 9mm and maybe step up to it later. If you're looking for long term versatility, go for a .40S&W model and swap to a 9mm barrel and mags. That way you can swap to the .357sig option down the road.

Plan2Live
December 8, 2012, 07:48 AM
Or buy a quality .40 caliber pistol from one of the major manufacturers then buy drop in replacement barrels for 9mm and .357 Sig. That way you can do most of your practicing with the cheaper 9mm but are set up to handle multiple calibers with one gun for that oh so wacky "what if" scenario when you might have to use whichever caliber is available. ;)

ActionJax
December 8, 2012, 09:01 AM
I like the multi-option. That's why I bought a Sig-Sauer P229 in 22 LR, then bought the top-end kit (also from Sig) in 9mm. They also have .40 cal, and yes ..... .357Sig available. Same gun, same platform and trigger, different calibers.

To answer the original question, 16 rounds of Winchester PDX-1 in 9mm should be enough, esp. when backed up by 8 rounds of reduced recoil 00 buck in 12 gauge.

For carry, I use 7 rounds of .380 in the pocket (Bodyguard), but am considering a 9mm Kahr PM9 (available with an external safety like the Bodyguard)

Hit_Factor
December 8, 2012, 09:15 AM
No question at all in my mind, 9mm for self defense.

Accurate shot placement is my main objective and 9mm is far easier to shoot. Especially, inside my home.

Hit_Factor
December 8, 2012, 09:17 AM
but am considering a 9mm Kahr PM9 (available with an external safety like the Bodyguard)

No need for the external safety on a Kahr. No energy is stored on striker spring until trigger is pulled.

ku4hx
December 8, 2012, 10:56 AM
Defend yourself with that which you consistently shoot best. If you feel the need, practice, practice, practice with a more powerful caliber until you gain the proficiency you need.

Shot placement is king. Better to hit with a lower powered round since the noise of a higher powered one only startles the roaches.

Pilot
December 8, 2012, 11:26 AM
9MM is fine for home defense. Modern JHP ammo has made the 9MM competitive to other popular SD rounds, plus as others have said, practice ammo is less expensive.

In addition, do you really want the extreme noise and muzzle blast indoors that comes with .357 Sig? 9MM is loud enough.

Kahr33556
December 8, 2012, 11:34 AM
9 mm using good + p ammo is all you need

GEM
December 8, 2012, 12:31 PM
Has the OP shot the 357 extensively? I've seen folks develop a flinch from it and not shot well.

3twelves
December 8, 2012, 04:29 PM
IMO .357 sig is the best performing out of the service calibers but has the most recoil and muzzle blast.

Skribs
December 8, 2012, 04:51 PM
You don't even need +P ammo, modern 9mm ammo will do the job just fine.

19-3Ben
December 8, 2012, 06:36 PM
I don't trust bottle neck cartridges in a semi auto pistol for SD

Erm.... why not? There is at least a theoretical reliability advantage. The only reason I say theoretical is that most modern pistols feed non-bottle-necked rounds so well and reliably that I don't know if the failure rate is actually any lower in bottle-neck rounds.

Certaindeaf
December 8, 2012, 07:02 PM
The parent of the 9mm Luger, the .30 Luger, was and is renowned for its feeding reliability.
I don't know if it has the same neck tension issues that the Sig has though.

R.W.Dale
December 8, 2012, 07:08 PM
my experience with 357 sig as a HD ccw weapon has lead me to recommend against it for others.

Ime the sig round is fatally flawed for folks who don't practice with what they carry with a .gov footing the bill. That flaw is bullet setback.

In a g32 with ranger t series ammunition just two rechamberings of the same round netted nearly .030" of bullet setback. If you actually shoot and practice with said firearm this will get expensive in a hurry.

So if you're a LEO that always unloads his magazines bullet first 357 offers a small but distinct improvement in ballistics.

But for the rest of us that minuscule advantage over 9mm+p doesn't justify the cost of ammunition with a limited load life




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complaints about

armsmaster270
December 8, 2012, 09:47 PM
I bought a Sig 226 in .40 and at the same time bought a spare barrel in 357 Sig I hardly use the .40 barrel any more. The 357 Sig has been my CCW caliber for a long time

RBid
December 9, 2012, 10:02 PM
If you can quickly and accurately put shots on target with the .357 SIG, can control it one-handed, and feel better carrying that, go for it.

The Lone Haranguer
December 9, 2012, 10:05 PM
In total agreement with post #5.

Rockyriver
December 9, 2012, 10:30 PM
If you want to get a 357 sig, Buy a 40 cal handgun that also offers the gun in 357 also. Then get a 357 barrel for SD and use the 40 also for SD and practice. The Magazines are the same.
Its the best of both worlds. The sig really rocks the walls at the firing range when I set it off. You can tell a big difference in sound over a 9mm, even with muffs on. I went with S&W M&P's. Midway has the barrels for cheap for the M&P if you get stock S&W barrels.
I suggest 357 sig when out on the town with the 124 grain Federal HST or Gold Dot 124 grain, and when at home as a night table gun run the 40 barrel with 180 Federal HST.
The 357 Sig to me would be a bear to handle with no ear protection in a house, not that the 40 is much quieter, however its more bearable. The 357 sig drops the bad boys real good when you look at police department statistics that use them.



http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac216/Rockyriver1234/AR15%20Stuff/DSCN3051.jpg

http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac216/Rockyriver1234/AR15%20Stuff/DSCN2918.jpg

AK103K
December 10, 2012, 12:02 AM
The only thing I ever noticed different between 357SIG and +P+ 9mm, was the 357SIG was a little louder. Either way, either of them will deafen you indoors.

The 357SIG isnt the big bad wolf some seem to think it is, it really is just basically a +P+ 9mm, and shoots the same as one in comparable guns.

Things I never had an problems with 357SIG are...

Shooting them. They are no harder to shoot than anything else.

Muzzle flash, any worse than anything else. I dont know what people who say they are flashy are shooting, but I never saw it with factory or reloads, even indoors.

Feeding. They feed fine, and better than some others. The pistols I have had the most trouble with feeding have been 1911's in .45acp.

Bullet setback with factory ammo. Then again, I never chambered a round more than twice to ever really see any. Reloads were never an issue, as they were compressed loads, and there was nowhere for the bullet to go but out.

Reloading them. They are as easy to load for as anything else.

About the only bad thing I can say about them is, ammo and bullets for reloading got real pricey there for awhile, and my Glock 31 was beating itself to death (something my SIG's never had an issue with).


With all that said, I got rid of all mine, and went back to 9mm. 9mm factory ammo is a lot cheaper, and so is reloading for it, so I get to shoot a lot more for the same money.

Bovice
December 10, 2012, 12:14 AM
357 SIG is very loud, in my experience. Reloaded with AA#9 (only way to go, IME) there was a lot of flash as well. Since factory ammo seems to also be loaded with a slow powder, there's a lot of residue. It's not any harder to shoot, once you get past the blast.

It's a special purpose round in my mind. Home defense isn't that purpose, because it's going to be.super loud and you'll probably feel like you've been hit with a flashbang. I've never shot it inside though, just a guess.

A sidearm while hunting or for keeping safe on long roadtrips on secluded highways would suit it well. It's got some serious penetration.

Preacher.
December 10, 2012, 12:28 AM
Thanks for all the info and pictures guys. I appreciate it. I think I'm gonna look into getting a .40 caliber that I can turn into a 357 sig, then I can play with the sig, but always have the .40 when Im done.

Preacher.
December 10, 2012, 12:30 AM
Thanks for the pics. Those are some nice guns.

Jaymo
December 10, 2012, 02:25 AM
Eh, I like 9mm better, because it gives me the options of standard pressure, +p, and +p+.
I don't want to shoot any of them indoors. Not even .22 short or LR.

Preacher.
December 10, 2012, 02:45 AM
CCW

Markel51
December 10, 2012, 01:38 PM
I'd recommend a Glock 23 and a KKM drop-in barrel in .357 SIG (stock mags work fine). The versatility of the Glock 23 is amazing. You can even go 9mm with a conversion barrel and Glock 19 mags. One gun, three calibers. :D

Hit_Factor
December 10, 2012, 01:41 PM
For max reliability in Glock 23 converted to 9mm consider swapping the ejector and extractor. Those parts are inexpensive and easily obtained.

Bovice
December 10, 2012, 03:00 PM
For max reliability in Glock 23 converted to 9mm consider swapping the ejector and extractor. Those parts are inexpensive and easily obtained.
If you're going to change the ejector and extractor in a glock 23 to shoot 9mm, you should have gotten a G19 and saved yourself the hassle. Barrel swaps are simple but that's going to require tools and little pieces everywhere.

If you want a 9-piece, get a 9-piece. Personally I don't agree with shooting something in a caliber it was not intended for.

otasan56
December 10, 2012, 03:05 PM
For SD I'd get the 9mmP. You can get 115 or 127gr JHP +p+ rounds for it that are very hard hitting. AND, practice ammo is easier to find.

Godsgunman
December 10, 2012, 03:11 PM
9mm gets my vote, its what I carry 90% of the time. Plus probably what I'll grab for HD at night since my CZ has night sites. I do also have a .357 Mag revolver I carry for winter and then is the house gun for the wife when I'm not carrying it (.38+P when with the wifey).

otasan56
December 10, 2012, 03:39 PM
Nice pictures of two hard-hitting pistols. I prefer my G17 and its 17 rounds of +p+ 115gr JHPs. And practice ammo is far easier to find. My Walmart always has 9mm in stock.

Corpral_Agarn
December 10, 2012, 04:24 PM
In my situation:
For home defense pistol--> Full size, all steel, heavy (42oz+ammo) = .357 Sig
For carry gun --> compact, steel slide/alloy frame, lighter (25oz+ammo) = 9mm

I am lucky enough to have both at my disposal.
I think that the .357 Sig is the "better" round but capacity is nice and follow up shots are irreplaceable. The margin that the .357 is better is not really that much once you hit the BG (its gonna hurt bad either way, just make sure you can do your part) but it is better. I find that the .357 is great for folks that need to shoot through something to stop threats. That's perfect for my house cause the only people that would get hurt would be intruders. Walking around on the street it is not necessary to penetrate quite that well.

Things like blast and noise are negligible to me because those things come second to stopping the threat as fast as possible. And out here in CA suppressors are not a celebrated addition to your firearm :banghead:.

9mm is also significantly easier to shoot well. That is important to note if you do not reload or have a ton of money for practice.

otasan56
December 10, 2012, 04:31 PM
So, what make/model of pistols you use for SD, at home and on the street?

Corpral_Agarn
December 10, 2012, 05:35 PM
Home (used to ccw it too): Sig Sauer P226 in .357/.40 and another slide for .22 (soon to be yet another for 9mm)

And I just picked up a Sig P239 in 9mm as my carry gun.
I guess I am a Sig guy... but only because the less expensive options just didn't fit me quite right. I have smaller hands and find the P239 with the Short Trigger fits the best. Great weapons, both, never had a failure yet. I also am a huge fan of the DA/SA systems but i grew up on revolvers and it makes sense to me...
You really can't go wrong with Glocks, Springfields, or Smith and Wessons that I have seen. Sigs just fit me best and I like metal guns.

brnmw
December 10, 2012, 05:39 PM
I like the .357 Sig. (I do not own one, just shot one a few times.) but too loud and too expensive and it does take a little more practice... so if you are on a budget, go with the .9X19mm.

otasan56
December 10, 2012, 05:48 PM
I carry a Glock 17 with WW 9mmP 115gr JHP +p+ loads. Since 1989.

Hit_Factor
December 10, 2012, 05:55 PM
I carry a Glock 17 with WW 9mmP 115gr JHP +p+ loads. Since 1989.

Probably time to shoot that stuff and buy a new box ;)

flyskater
December 10, 2012, 08:31 PM
I reload for the 357 sig. My 125gr GDHP chrono's at 1608 with my glock 32. (faster than underwood ammo)
In order for that to equal a 9mm, you'll need a 9mm +++ppp+++ ammo. Loud as heck though.

Certaindeaf
December 11, 2012, 10:59 AM
I'll bet the paper targets are impressed. I don't know how smart it is to hot load a necked down .40 S&W to beyond +P levels especially for a Gock. The Sig and the .40 are already +P'd out.
9mm can safely handle very high pressures, higher than the .40 and Sig because the case is stronger.

Corpral_Agarn
December 11, 2012, 11:30 AM
I'll bet the paper targets are impressed. I don't know how smart it is to hot load a necked down .40 S&W to beyond +P levels especially for a Gock. The Sig and the .40 are already +P'd out.
9mm can safely handle very high pressures, higher than the .40 and Sig because the case is stronger.

I can think of a few agencies that are just as impressed as the paper targets (Secret Service, IIRC). IMHO the round has it uses.

Now, I am not a reloader here, and don't have any reloading manuals, but something about the above doesn't sound quite right and Wikipedia doesn't quite agree (I know its not a good source but...).

Max Pressure for .357= 40,000 psi
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_SIG)

Max Pressure for .40= 35,000 psi
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.40_S%26W)

Max Pressure for 9mm= 34,084 psi
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9%C3%9719mm_Parabellum)

As I understand it, .357 Sig is not just a necked 40. I was told that the .357 cases are little thicker than the .40 to account for the bottleneck(?) and/or increased pressure. It is my understanding that you can get into some serious "ka-boom" territory if you try to neck a .40 to .357 Sig.
I encourage anyone on here to set me straight, though. I would be very interested in learning more about this stuff.

Corpral_Agarn
December 11, 2012, 11:47 AM
So i subtracted the bullet diameter from the neck diameter and got this:

.357
Case Thickness (Neck Diameter-Bullet Diameter)= .026
.40
Case Thickness (Neck Diameter-Bullet Diameter)= .023
9mm
Case Thickness (Neck Diameter-Bullet Diameter)= 0.25

And it looks like the .40 does have a thinner case thickness. So now I am curious as to if .002 makes a significant difference in the way a cartridge handles pressures.
Please bear with me, I am still trying to learn here...

AABEN
December 11, 2012, 12:06 PM
Why not a 40 ?

56hawk
December 11, 2012, 01:17 PM
So i subtracted the bullet diameter from the neck diameter and got this:

It's the base that's important not the neck. Found this picture that shows 9mm vs 40, but couldn't find 357 Sig:

http://www.ronterry.com/arms/images/bp-9mm.jpg

tipoc
December 11, 2012, 01:30 PM
I'm attaching two reports from workshops held by an ammo manufacturer (Speer/Federal) for several police agencies in 2008 and 2009 in Colorado and Montana. In the tests 9mm, 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 45acp and .223 ammo was fired into or through several media (auto glass, sheet rock, etc.) and into ballistic gel.

The results are instructive and give a good look at some of the characteristics of modern ammo. You also see an indicator of the different performance of the rounds used.

Ft. Collins, Colorado 2008

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/FedWoundBallisticsWorkshops/Ft_CollinsPoliceDpmt.pdf

Butte, Montana 2009

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/FedWoundBallisticsWorkshops/Butte_WBW_5_27_09.pdf

tipoc

Corpral_Agarn
December 11, 2012, 01:42 PM
I'm attaching two reports from workshops held by an ammo manufacturer (Speer/Federal) for several police agencies in 2008 and 2007 in Colorado and Montana. In the tests 9mm, 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 45acp and .223 ammo was fired into or through several media (auto glass, sheet rock, etc.) and into ballistic gel.

The results are instructive and give a good look at some of the characteristics of modern ammo. You also see an indicator of the different performance of the rounds used.

Ft. Collins, Colorado 2007

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/FedWoundBallisticsWorkshops/Ft_CollinsPoliceDpmt.pdf

Butte, Montana 2008

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/FedWoundBallisticsWorkshops/Butte_WBW_5_27_09.pdf

tipoc
Thanks for the info, but that site is blocked at my current location.
Can anyone Summarize it real quick?

It's the base that's important not the neck. Found this picture that shows 9mm vs 40, but couldn't find 357 Sig:

Please forgive my ignorance, but why is that?

56hawk
December 11, 2012, 01:48 PM
Please forgive my ignorance, but why is that?

Because that is where the unsupported part of the case is. Most barrels have a cutout for the extractor and the feed ramp. In these areas the brass is all that is containing the pressure. The rest of the case is just a gasket and the pressure is contained by the steel barrel.

http://www.gunandgame.com/forums/attachments/glock/35342d1287379256-any-bad-glocks-stock-glock-40cal-barrel.-note-where-ramp-meets-case-compare-bar-sto-barrel.jpg

AK103K
December 11, 2012, 01:56 PM
Max Pressure for .357= 40,000 psi
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.357_SIG)

Max Pressure for .40= 35,000 psi
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.40_S%26W)

Max Pressure for 9mm= 34,084 psi
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9%C3%9719mm_Parabellum)

Standard 9mm is spec'd at 35000psi, +p is 38500, and +P+ is 40000psi, or at least according to the engineer at Speer I talked to.

He also stated that bullets of a similar weight (124-125 grains), loaded to the same pressures (40000), will give similar performance. If hes right, and it sounds reasonable to me, then +P+ 9mm and 357SIG should work basically the same.

As I understand it, .357 Sig is not just a necked 40. I was told that the .357 cases are little thicker than the .40 to account for the bottleneck(?) and/or increased pressure. It is my understanding that you can get into some serious "ka-boom" territory if you try to neck a .40 to .357 Sig.
I encourage anyone on here to set me straight, though. I would be very interested in learning more about this stuff.
I think its probably more of a necked down 10mm. What happens when you neck down a .40 to 357SIG, the case will come up 3-4 thousandths short.

Ive loaded a lot of 357SIG, and have inadvertently, sized, loaded, and then fired .40 brass in a 357SIG, and on more than one occasion. Nothing bad happened when it fired, and I probably never would have noticed, except that while reloading the cases again, I just happened to notice the .40 head stamp on a 357SIG case. I have no idea as to how many times that case had been fired, but it was likely a number of times.

The problem with shooting 357SIG in an area where there is .40S&W brass present, is that its very difficult to tell them apart unless you look closely at each piece of brass. I used to size my brass first through a .40 carbide sizer, and then a standard 357SIG sizing die. The .40 cases will go right up into a 357SIG die, and come out looking , and for all intents and purposes, being a 357SIG case. When youre loading 3-500 rounds at a time, even when handling the brass multiple times during the process, its very easy for the .40s to slip through.

2zulu1
December 11, 2012, 03:24 PM
One of the selling points for duty 357 SIG carry has been its performance against auto glass/steel.

Enter Hornady's Critical Duty 9mm 135gr +P ammunition, it passed all FBI protocol tests;

http://m.hornady.com/store/9MM-LUGER-P-135-gr-FlexLock-Critical-DUTY/

FWIW, this Hornady ammunition can be purchased in 50 round boxes for less than Hornady's retail 25 round price.

Ranger 9mm T/bonded ammunition also performs heads up with the 357 SIG, especially through heavy clothing.

tipoc
December 11, 2012, 03:49 PM
Thanks for the info, but that site is blocked at my current location.
Can anyone Summarize it real quick?

It's best to review the information for oneself...but quickly...

9mm, 40 and 45 acp all perform on a par with .357 Sig with certain Federal and Speer bullets in a variety of weights through a variety of the FBIs barrier protocol. Not all the tests were done with all weight bullets but the test procedures and results are useful information.

tipoc

Fiv3r
December 11, 2012, 04:15 PM
It sounds like the OP is going with a .40 which makes a little more fiscal sense to me than the .357Sig.

I have NO problem with a quality 9mm for Self/Home defense. I used to keep the .357 Mag handy but decided that the blast and report was just WAY too much for indoors. Out in the woods, my 6.5" .357 Blackhawk is king. However, out in the wilds of the urban jungle, I rather prefer a nice subcompact 9mm Glock. Controllable, cost effective, more firepower, etc.

At home, I actually like the 1911. Chunky easily controllable pistol that isn't as deafening as the .357.

OilyPablo
December 12, 2012, 10:52 AM
My main bed side semiauto is a Sig P229 in 357SIG. Mainly because I shoot so well with the gun and how it's NEVER had a misfeed of any variety. It does take practice. I want that little extra firepower in hand gun before I can pick up a rifle. 9mm and .45ACP are fine, but the cases of 9mm coming up short do not instill confidence at any level, for me.

I don't at all get the recoil and flinch comments. The round is very easy in the recoil department, sorta loud as some say, but not AR-15 loud.

Elessar
December 12, 2012, 12:30 PM
I don't think you really gain anything with .357 sig under most SD circumstances using JHP rounds. You get higher velocity but that usually means less penatration due to faster expansion. Certainly not enough benefit to justify higher blast and recoil.

124 to 147 grain 9mm at moderate velocity seem to be the best performers.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Misc_Images/DocGKR/Handgun_gel_comparison.jpg

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm#9mm

otasan56
December 13, 2012, 08:07 AM
Probably time to shoot that stuff and buy a new box ;)
The G17 is 23 years old, but the ammo is two years old!

mdauben
December 13, 2012, 12:02 PM
I've wanted a Sig Saur P266 DAK in .357 Sig for years. The .357 Sig was one of those cartridges that just facinated me since it came out. Very high "cool factor". :cool:

I think either one would be a good choice for self defence. Honestly, though, I'm not sure you would see any significant real-world difference between a 125gr .357 Sig and a 124gr 9mm +P round from one of the better manufacturers. Cool as the .357 Sig may be, the 9mm is going to be cheaper, easier to find and probably just as effective.

481
December 13, 2012, 06:03 PM
The G17 is 34 years old, but the ammo is two years old!

Wow. :what:

How'd you get one that was made in 1978? :confused: (2012 - 34 = 1978)

They weren't made 'til 1980 and weren't imported in to the US until 1986.

GreyCoupe
December 13, 2012, 08:34 PM
Concur with earlier posts; get what you shoot well. Poor shot placement loses. Practice with both, and decide.

razorback2003
December 13, 2012, 08:58 PM
I like the 357 sig round. I think it has less recoil than 40 cal in similar guns. The problem is 357 sig ammo is generally more expensive than 40 and of course more expensive than 9mm.

A light 357 sig pistol would make a great back up to deer hunt.

I pick 9mm just because the ammo is cheaper. If i could afford to shoot 357 sig ammo a lot I would own one.

Scoob
December 13, 2012, 10:21 PM
Go with a 9mm or .40. From my own reloading adventures I've found that .40 can do anything 357 sig can do with lite bullets and out-performs it with heavier bullets.

I personally like using sub-sonic loads for the bed side. A 147gr 9mm or 180gr .40 would be just the ticket. I LOVE the 180gr HST .40 load. It expands into a monster.

I'm not a big .45 fan but the more power you can get without going super-sonic the better. The bigger, heavier bullet will give you more thump without the velocity.

EDIT: Wow my 69th post in 10 years. I'm on a roll lol.

wv109323
December 13, 2012, 10:48 PM
If you put 2 or 3 well placed rounds into a home invader he will not ask you " was that a .357 Sig or a plain 9mm."
It is all about shot placement.

otasan56
December 14, 2012, 09:20 AM
Wow. :what:

How'd you get one that was made in 1978? :confused: (2012 - 34 = 1978)

They weren't made 'til 1980 and weren't imported in to the US until 1986.
My mistake - I got my G17 in 1989. That makes it 23 years.

lobo9er
December 14, 2012, 09:31 AM
unless someone else is buying me ammo supplies I'd go 9mm. Also as RC said extra flash and bang if you had to use it might not be worth it.

lobo9er
December 14, 2012, 09:34 AM
I would have liked there to have been a 380 on that picture of the bullets through also just for comparison.

Certaindeaf
December 14, 2012, 11:15 AM
It bounced off. lolz

flyskater
December 14, 2012, 02:45 PM
That's why I try to be polite before shooting them. I would ask them what caliber they would like to be shot with. :D

tech30528
December 15, 2012, 10:31 PM
I have a Glock 33, the subcompact .357 sig. When in it's role as a SD pistol it is loaded with some nasty hollowpoints. But .357 is expensive for practice so I bought a 9mm barrel and recoil springs for it. It converts in seconds.

Gary G23
December 16, 2012, 12:37 PM
I have a S&W M&P .40cal for home protection but carry a S&W M&P 357. I figure the noise and muzzle flash won't bother me if I'm outdoors. Also I might need the barrier penetration outdoors.

I've owned lots of pistols in several different calibers and have fired many rounds. When I first got a 357 I noticed the steel targets in my backyard range got destroyed in no time at all. The same targets shot with 9mm and 40cal had lasted a long time. It convinced me. YMMV.

otasan56
December 16, 2012, 01:37 PM
I am voting for the 9mmP. More than enough hitting power, and more rounds in the magazine.

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm VS. 357 Sig. FOR HOME/SELF DEFENSE?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!