Why .357 sig When there's 38 super


PDA






JRWhit
January 21, 2014, 07:37 AM
Looking at .357 sig, I'm having a hard time figuring out what niche it fills. It is looking to me like it was purely I a marketing ploy to sell guns with a new better design cartridge, when in reality, was just another way to package what already existed. Perhaps I'm missing something but the performance appears to mirror that of the predated 38 Super. I have not concluded any advantage in the .357 sig over the 38 super. If anything I would think that the straight case of the super would yield higher magazine capacities without added grip width. Thoughts?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why .357 sig When there's 38 super" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
au_prospector
January 21, 2014, 07:56 AM
Looks like standard load .357 Sig are more powerful than standard load .380 Super. Velocity and pressure are quite a bit higher according to Lyman 49. Neither is really a common chamber are they? I think some PDs use the Sig.

Torian
January 21, 2014, 07:57 AM
JR, the .38 super is a longer round however, isn't it?

JTQ
January 21, 2014, 08:20 AM
The .38 Super is a longer cartridge.

In Glock terms, you can get .357 SIG in a G17/G19 (G22/G23) size gun (I don't know what number the .357SIG is in the Glock line up), while the .38 Super would need to go in the G21 size gun. The G21 is a much bigger gun.

If you are a 1911 guy, there is no advantage to the .357 SIG as the 1911 has room for the .38 Super and the .357 SIG would need some special accommodation for the mags to get it to work in the 1911.

JRWhit
January 21, 2014, 08:52 AM
The 38 super is a longer cartridge. Maybe their is an advantage to the reloader, but when comparing factory loads, velocity per bullet weight is nearly identical. I can see the advantage to the manufacturer using existing platforms with nothing more than a barrel to go from one to the other.
But the length isn't any longer than 10mm or 45acp, leaving many platforms available with grip size needed to acomidate all be it the larger frame of choices. I can see the advantage their but at the cost of capacity.

Ohen Cepel
January 21, 2014, 09:07 AM
IIRC the Super didn't get a good rep when it came out since it headspaces on the mouth of the cartridge. People didn't understand this and as a result the was seen to have bad accuracy and never really caught on in the US. Much more common in places which banned "military ammo" like Mexico and South America.

In the end, it's easier to sell NEW to people than old and not popular.

I'm with you though and would likely go Super over the SIG in this case. Super has several things going for it in my mind, the biggest is easier to reload. However, I don't see either being real common down the road but I think the Super will hang on better than the SIG in the long term. Decades of Supers have been made and are still being made so I think it will hand on but won't be common.

The SIG isn't a bad round but a bit of a niche and a bit harder to reload. When the police backed away from it after only a few years it's fate didn't look bright.

LT.Diver
January 21, 2014, 09:09 AM
Headspaces on the mouth of the case? So does the .45acp, 9 mm, and a boat load of other rounds.

JTQ
January 21, 2014, 09:20 AM
JRWhit wrote,
But the length isn't any longer than 10mm or 45acp, leaving many platforms available with grip size needed to acomidate all be it the larger frame of choices.
That is correct. If you want a 1911, there is no advantage to getting a .357 SIG. You are much better off with .38 Super, or maybe even 9x23 Winchester.

However, the .357 SIG was designed for guns the size of the SIG P229, G17/G19, etc. The .38 Super does not fit in those guns. That's why we have the .357 SIG.

Devonai
January 21, 2014, 09:48 AM
One advantage of the .357 Sig is that if you already have a pistol in .40 S&W, all you need to buy is a new barrel. This gives you the flexibility to try out a new cartridge and see if you like it.

If not, you're only out ~$100 for the barrel, and they're pretty easy to sell second-hand so you'll make most of your money back.

I tried this out with my Glock 27 and a Glock 32 barrel. It wasn't a bad combo.

rbernie
January 21, 2014, 09:59 AM
^^^ This.

The 38 Super is also longer, limiting the pistols/magwells in which it fits. I can get the 357 Sig in a 9mm sized magwell but the 38 Super requires a 45 ACP sized magwell.

SDGlock23
January 21, 2014, 10:54 AM
Smaller OAL means it fits in smaller framed guns.

I'd say that all in all it out muscles the .38 Super as well.

Both can be loaded with .357" bullets.

357 sounds cooler than 38, so it clearly wins.

pendennis
January 21, 2014, 11:10 AM
IIRC the Super didn't get a good rep when it came out since it headspaces on the mouth of the cartridge. People didn't understand this and as a result the was seen to have bad accuracy and never really caught on in the US. Much more common in places which banned "military ammo" like Mexico and South America.

In the end, it's easier to sell NEW to people than old and not popular.

I'm with you though and would likely go Super over the SIG in this case. Super has several things going for it in my mind, the biggest is easier to reload. However, I don't see either being real common down the road but I think the Super will hang on better than the SIG in the long term. Decades of Supers have been made and are still being made so I think it will hand on but won't be common.

The SIG isn't a bad round but a bit of a niche and a bit harder to reload. When the police backed away from it after only a few years it's fate didn't look bright.
The original .38 Super barrels head spaced on the cartridge rim. This flaw created accuracy problems, which weren't corrected by Colt, until the late 1980's, when the barrels were then chambered to head space on the cartridge case mouth. Before that there were barrel makers (Bar-Sto, etc.) who were building accurate barrels.

ATLDave
January 21, 2014, 11:10 AM
JTQ got it. What's your preferred platform? Was it designed around 9mm/.40? Or around .45ACP?

ATLDave
January 21, 2014, 11:12 AM
The original .38 Super barrels head spaced on the cartridge rim. This flaw created accuracy problems, which weren't corrected by Colt, until the late 1980's, when the barrels were then chambered to head space on the cartridge case mouth. Before that there were barrel makers (Bar-Sto, etc.) who were building accurate barrels.

There's also the issue of the semi-rimmed case purportedly causing some reliability issues with .38 super. But one can now get .38 super comp brass that has the rim flush with the case wall; may have to re-tension the extractor for those to work, but that solves that issue, to the extent it is one.

VA27
January 21, 2014, 01:08 PM
The 357SIG was designed to duplicate 125gr 357 Magnum velocities in a 9mm sized semiauto platform, and it pretty much succeeded. When I did T&E for my agency the 125gr SIG ran 1300-1400fps. Our 4" 357 revolvers were launching 125gr magnum rounds at 1200-1300fps. If it matters, 357SIG rounds use .355 (9mm) bullets.

I wonder how many rounds of 38 Super a Glock 21 sized mag would hold? 18? 20? A Glock 41 in 38 Super would attract me.

TRX
January 21, 2014, 05:52 PM
The .357 Sig is basically a necked-down .40, and will feed through a gun designed for .40 caliber with little or no modification to the magazine, breechface, or feed ramp. Some .40 caliber guns allow conversion to .357 Sig just by swapping out the barrel. Therefore, marketing the .357 costs the manufacturer little.

The .38 Super is still just as super as it ever was, but the Super is enough different from 9mm (the most-similar cartridge in size) that conversion may require a longer magwell, different breechface, different magazine feed lips, etc.

My latest 1911 build was going to be .38 Super, until someone sold me a beautiful stainless .45 slide at a price I couldn't refuse. <sigh>

TestPilot
January 21, 2014, 05:56 PM
Simeple answer:

You cannot fit a 38 Super into a double stack magazine self-loader without the grip being oversized.

10mm Glock 20 cannot be easy to grip as 40S&W Glock 22. 357SIG fit into any 40S&W pistol.

Remember that a lot of double action wonder 9 pistols have too fat of a grip even when they just use 9mm.

ArchAngelCD
January 21, 2014, 07:10 PM
The .38 Super got a bad rap because it was the same size as the .38 Auto and sometimes a .38 Super round would find it's way into a .38 Auto handgun so eventually the .38 Super was downloaded. If the .38 Super is loaded to it's original specs it's more powerful than the .357 Sig and it's also a straight walled cartridge unlike the .357 Sig which is a plus when reloading IMO.

Most of all the .38 Super is chambered is some really nice old handguns so if you want to shoot those guns you need the ammo... (like Colt 1911's and some newer kimbers)

JRWhit
January 21, 2014, 09:32 PM
I suppose I can see the platform size definitely pushing the sig into production. Although it didn't seem to help the G.A.P. any for very long. A Glock 41 in 38 Super would attract me. +1
If I could get a P220 or P227 in 38 super that would be my immediate favorite. I would think 15+1 would be easily achieved.

BSA1
January 21, 2014, 09:56 PM
In general bottleneck cartridges feed better than straight wall cartridges.

Tacoma
January 22, 2014, 12:33 AM
As others have hit on, the 357 Sig is simply a necked down 40 that gives 357 Mag like performance out of an ordinary duty gun. It attains this with nothing but a barrel swap (either from the manufacturer or the buyer.) This makes them cheap to market and smart to purchase. The 357 Sig has become attractive to many PD's/agencies as it keeps the logistics simple and the choices of "modern handguns" wide. None of these agencies would be lining up to buy 1911's in 38 Super despite the closeness of the ballistics.

FWIW, I own two 357 Sig barrels that fit in an M&P 40 and Glock 22. Both are fun to shoot and easy to change back to 40S&W when they are not.
BTW, the 357 can be easily hand loaded down to 9mm specs to give the gun triple duty at no additional costs.

9mmepiphany
January 22, 2014, 12:57 AM
IIf I could get a P220...in 38 super that would be my immediate favorite.
They made those, you just have to find one

twofifty
January 22, 2014, 02:19 AM
Magazine capacity and bullet velocity are two advantages of the 38 Super and 38 Super Comp variant.

THE major advantage is that the large powder capacity of the fast 38s generates the large volume of gasses needed to properly run the compensators used in USPSA/IPSC Open Division. Competitors develop loads that produce accuracy AND the gas volume that keeps the sight/gun on target.

A well-tuned 2011 type (i.e. double stack) Open race gun recoils to the rear only, not upward. The competitor can place 2 quick rounds on target and move on. The interval between accurate shots can be 2/10 second or less.

ATLDave
January 22, 2014, 11:11 AM
A well-tuned 2011 type (i.e. double stack) Open race gun recoils to the rear only, not upward. The competitor can place 2 quick rounds on target and move on. The interval between accurate shots can be 2/10 second or less.

Yeah, and they can deafen an entire indoor range at that same speed! ;)

There are now a lot of people running 9mm major guns which seem to drive the comps OK, even though the powder capacity is a lot smaller (usually because they want to build an open gun on a short-action platform, like a Glock 17). Of course, cases fail on those things a little too much for my taste! Little freakin' hand grenades...

powder
January 22, 2014, 11:34 AM
Looking at .357 sig, I'm having a hard time figuring out what niche it fills.

It is essentially just a replacement for the .357 mag. for LE use, developed around '92 IIRC, put into a nice DS package which of course gives higher round count than the S&W wheelguns.

LOTS of agencies still run it.

ATLDave
January 22, 2014, 11:41 AM
a nice DS package

What's a "DS package"? Never heard that term before.

mavracer
January 22, 2014, 01:49 PM
What I find amusing about it is following the timeline. The 38 super was found to penatrate auto sheet metal and the body armor of the early 30s, part of the developement of the 357 magnum was to put that ability into the revolvers carried by LE. Then we develope the 357 sig to put 357 power back into a auto platform. many of the early doublestack guns were 10-12 round capasity a single stack 1911 in 38 super holds 10.

Ankeny
January 22, 2014, 01:58 PM
There are now a lot of people running 9mm major guns which seem to drive the comps OK... Yup, change in power factor makes the 9mm viable. FWIW, the 38 Super can be loaded hot as heck in the right platform. I load 124 grain bullets to 1400 fps in my open gun. I wouldn't want to shoot one of those rounds through my Colt Lwt. Commander. Many 38 Supers do not have fully supported chambers.

JohnBiltz
January 22, 2014, 03:47 PM
There were a lot of .38 Supers chambered by major manufactures in the 80s. I had an Astra A80 in .38 Super. It was a great gun but ammo availability was tough. The same gun in .45 had ten rounds in the magazine compared to 15 rounds of .38 super. In something like a Glock 30 I would guess you would again get 15 rounds and in a Glock 21, the rule is generally 2/3 so probably 19 to 20 rounds in a .38 super G21. Pretty serious firepower there.

SharpsDressedMan
January 22, 2014, 08:29 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned it, but sometimes, bottleneck cartridges can be more difficult to load for. The short neck doesn't leave much room for error in sizing, and occasionally, if the die or brass thickness is off, the bullet doesn't have enough friction, and gets pushed in the case too easily when going up the feed ramp. I like the .357 SIG, but have experienced the above on occasion. When everything is right, it is a great cartridge, and factory ammo is usually fine. Reloaders must use just a little more scrutiny than straight walled case loading.

rbernie
January 22, 2014, 10:37 PM
In fairness, it's not the bottleneck shape that contributes to the behavior that you've accurately described, but short necks that don't have adequate contact with the bullet shank.

SharpsDressedMan
January 22, 2014, 10:47 PM
Correct. It was that SHORT bottleNECK! :D

torqem
January 22, 2014, 10:47 PM
Semi-rimmed cases are less reliable for feeding, than rimless cases, especially with jhp's, and the shorter the slide stroke of the gun, the worse this is. Bottle necked rds feed wonderously reliably, guys, since a smaller front end of the rd is starting into a conserably larger chamber. The longer a rd is, for a given diameter, the less reliably it feeds. The .38 super has always been wussy loaded, from the factories, cause it can be fired in junker old .38 ACP autos.

Why settle for the .38 super, when the 9x23 Win greatly outperforms the super? The 357 sig supposedly can have bullet push/back issues on feeding, due to the short neck of the case not offering as much of a surface to grip the bullet as a straight walled case does. However, empirical evidence from quite a bit of Sig use has shown that this "problem" rarely surfaces. It is the reason given why factories don't want to load the 90 gr jhp in the Sig rd, tho. I say "carry the Sig, but have a 9mm just like it, to practice with".

goon
January 22, 2014, 10:56 PM
Headspaces on the mouth of the case? So does the .45acp, 9 mm, and a boat load of other rounds.

I think the issue was though that the .38 Super is a semi-rimmed round. Rather than headspacing on the case mouth the way it should, some guns were made to headspace on the rim. This contributed to the reputation for poor accuracy... at least until someone figured out to headspace on the mouth the way it should be done.

torqem
January 22, 2014, 11:12 PM
when he designed the .25, .32 and 38 ACP rounds. Yes, he designed the cartridges too. Quite a man.

Weevil
January 23, 2014, 02:04 PM
I suppose I can see the platform size definitely pushing the sig into production. Although it didn't seem to help the G.A.P. any for very long.


Well the .357 sig hasn't exactly taken the world by storm either.

Only a small handful of makers offer pistols for it and if it wasn't for the fact that .40 platforms can be easily converted, you probably wouldn't even have those. A .40 simply needs a barrel swap to shoot .357 sig.

The .40 platforms cannot be converted to the GAP due to the breechface.

RussellC
January 23, 2014, 02:19 PM
Headspaces on the mouth of the case? So does the .45acp, 9 mm, and a boat load of other rounds.
That's what I was thinking. Dont all semi auto pistols headspace on the case mouth? Opps, seem like post 33 clears it up..

Russellc

JRWhit
January 24, 2014, 08:05 AM
They made those, you just have to find one
Google search, found.
I'm both ecstatic and disappointed. Wish they would have taken advantage of a double stack magazine.

Peter M. Eick
January 24, 2014, 08:58 AM
You can't get a 229 sport in 38 super.

http://eickpm.com/picts/229sport_mags.jpg

I really like my 229 sport and so therefore I really like the 357 Sig.

9mmepiphany
January 24, 2014, 01:55 PM
Google search, found.
I'm both ecstatic and disappointed. Wish they would have taken advantage of a double stack magazine.
They didn't make a double stack pistol when the 220 was introduced. The original chamberings were 9x19mm (to replace the 210 as military issue) , .45ACP and .38 Super. The .38 Super has never sold very well.

The Browning marked 220, chambered in .38 Super, is quite a collectors item

9mmepiphany
January 24, 2014, 02:00 PM
You can't get a 229 sport in 38 super.
You can get a 220 Sport and have it converted...but you'd have to really want one. ($$$)

http://www.gunshopfinder.com/sig/p220-sport-large.jpg

tipoc
January 24, 2014, 03:10 PM
In general bottleneck cartridges feed better than straight wall cartridges.

With rifle rounds that's true. Handguns not so much. Think on it some. When was the last time you heard folks complain that the 9mm was a poorly feeding cartridge? Or the 45acp? Or for that matter the 38 Super? Folks that shoot the Super know it feeds well.

EAA Tanfoglio and Para-Ord have both built double stack guns for the 38 Super. The semi-rim case did not prevent them from working.

John Browning designed the 38acp cartridge as a semi rimmed case back in the 1890s and stuck it in his first pistols. A number of rounds designed back then were semi-rimmed. Colt made these guns at the turn of the century till 1927. Then Colt saw that sales were low and placed the 38acp in the 1911 that they called the Colt Super 38. Same cartridge but in a stronger gun so they loaded the cartridge up. Eventually the round became known as the 38 Super. Been around since 1928, well actually 1898. It's popularity has gone up and down.

It's too good to die.

Read more about it here...www.38super.net

tipoc

powder
January 24, 2014, 04:52 PM
What's a "DS package"? Never heard that term before.
Double stack

JRWhit
January 25, 2014, 09:17 AM
With rifle rounds that's true. Handguns not so much. Think on it some. When was the last time you heard folks complain that the 9mm was a poorly feeding cartridge? Or the 45acp? Or for that matter the 38 Super? Folks that shoot the Super know it feeds well.

EAA Tanfoglio and Para-Ord have both built double stack guns for the 38 Super. The semi-rim case did not prevent them from working.

John Browning designed the 38acp cartridge as a semi rimmed case back in the 1890s and stuck it in his first pistols. A number of rounds designed back then were semi-rimmed. Colt made these guns at the turn of the century till 1927. Then Colt saw that sales were low and placed the 38acp in the 1911 that they called the Colt Super 38. Same cartridge but in a stronger gun so they loaded the cartridge up. Eventually the round became known as the 38 Super. Been around since 1928, well actually 1898. It's popularity has gone up and down.

It's too good to die.

Read more about it here...www.38super.net

tipoc
I have toiled over the EAA Witness Elites in 38 Super for some time. I've been back and forth between that and an STI Trojan. I like both platforms and it's hard to edge one out over the other.

Peter M. Eick
January 26, 2014, 10:25 AM
I never really liked the look of the 220 sport and how it bolts the comp on. It lacks the clean lines of the 229 Sport. As a long time 38 Super fan, I bought the sport because the 357 Sig seemed like a reasonable approximation of the Super.

I have often wondered why the 229 sport was not more popular. I guess it is because it is just a range toy for fun.

Both are good rounds. The Sig is probably easier to reload I find and it seems to be more consistent over the Chrono. The Sig tends to have single digit SD's, while the Super tends to be more in the low double digits.

My Witness Elite Match has never bobbled once. I picked up some supercomp brass but have never even opened the box. The super just seems to feed and fire easily sowhy mess with it.

9mmepiphany
January 26, 2014, 02:43 PM
I have often wondered why the 229 sport was not more popular. I guess it is because it is just a range toy for fun.

It is the weight.

The all steel 220ST and 226ST, and now the Elites and X-5s, have always been more popular, because when you get a compact gun, you are usually expecting something lighter.

Elkins45
January 27, 2014, 09:13 AM
Well the .357 sig hasn't exactly taken the world by storm either.

Secret Service uses it, as do the Texas Rangers and a couple of other state police agencies IIRC. There must be a decent number of large scale consumers of the round because used brass is available in quantity from a number of sellers for about the same prices as 40S&W or 9mm.

If you're a reloader it has the advantage of cheap brass, and has an advantage over 40 if you're a bullet caster trying to conserve your lead supply. And now that I've been taught the trick of sizing in a 40S&W carbide die it's not all that much more of a PITA to load.

MagnumDweeb
January 27, 2014, 12:09 PM
I thought about doing the Sig .357 if I was able to get one of those XD .40's with the 5" plus barrels and then converting it to Sig .357. I have a lot of spent .40 brass laying around that I'd like to resize but until I get a case trimmer I'm going to hold off on it. But that's a very narrow use for the caliber.

To be perfectly honest I only really like the .38 Super in 1911 but that's more of a personal bias than anything. In a Rock ISland 1911 the .38 Super is a soft shooting gun when using South America made ammo and that's part of the reason I like it. I can load 125 grain cast lead RN bullets to 1100 fps and they feed well. Not something I'd want to rely on for SD but it is a pleasant, soft, and accurate shooter at twenty yards when shooting one handed.

For SD it's a snub nosed .357 magnum (Ruger SP101), .40 Glock 23, or Bersa 9mm ultra compact, with the occasional appearance of a Ruger P90 or Glock 20.

Carry on.

tipoc
January 27, 2014, 09:31 PM
I don't see it as a one or the other question. To me it's more about the guns than the round.

tipoc

Jenrick
January 28, 2014, 08:02 PM
Peter M. Eick: Which mag base plates are you using?

-Jenrick

Peter M. Eick
January 28, 2014, 10:31 PM
Those are standard 229 Sport mags. They look nice work well but only give you 10 rounds which was all you could get at the time. A 12 round 229 mag will work fine with the gun.

I got a great deal on the mags at a cdnn close out. I think I paid $9/mag or something like that so I bought a bunch. I bought the spare top end a few years ago.

The 229 sport has a "beaffier" barrel that is thicker and heavier than a standard 229 also the stainless slide and aluminum comp are hard to come "buy" so I picked up a spare. This is actually one of my highest round count guns. I have about 12,000 rounds down it now and will get back out shooting it soon.

Today we had no work due to the ice storm so I cranked 974 rounds of 38 Super in my standard 135 grn MBC LRN that cranks out 1350 FPS with 4756. Great round to shoot out of my Supers.

tipoc
January 30, 2014, 03:12 AM
That sounds like a fun load!

tipoc

BCRider
January 30, 2014, 07:37 PM
Did Sig ever aspire to make it big in the law enforcement market? If they did I could see the lure of being offered a semi auto with the same performance of the .357Mag revolvers that would be used by many agencies of the day.

torqem
January 30, 2014, 08:14 PM
that helps with both feeding and extraction. It should be obvious that when you start a 9mm bullet into a .40 rear end chamber, there's more room for error.

9mmepiphany
January 30, 2014, 08:49 PM
Did Sig ever aspire to make it big in the law enforcement market? If they did I could see the lure of being offered a semi auto with the same performance of the .357Mag revolvers that would be used by many agencies of the day.

SIG was a major player in LE sidearms when S&W faded. The choices were pretty much between SIG and Beretta...until Glock started giving away their guns to departments who were willing to switch

Jenrick
January 31, 2014, 12:08 AM
Sig is still involved in LE. Several state police agencies still run sigs in a variety of forms, and a lot of federal agencies carried them (and still do).

The .357 Sig round got some penetration into LE, again mostly with state police agencies and federal agencies.

-Jenrick

Bezoar
January 31, 2014, 01:08 AM
.357 sig is a proprietary round, and it makes them money. It also fits in within existing tooling. 38 super doesnt.

goon
January 31, 2014, 02:34 AM
Did Sig ever aspire to make it big in the law enforcement market? If they did I could see the lure of being offered a semi auto with the same performance of the .357Mag revolvers that would be used by many agencies of the day.

IIRC, when the .357 SIG was first introduced, the idea was to try to get an equivalent load to a 125 grain .357 Magnum load, only have it in a semi-auto with double the magazine capacity.
Not sure why it didn't really take off in LEO circles. It probably didn't grab hold of the civilian market because 9mm +P isn't too far off and .40 S&W, which the .357 SIG is based on, also seems to work pretty well at stopping attackers. Combine that with the fact that it's more work to reload and the ammo is more expensive and less available...

Just my guess anyhow.

zaphar
January 31, 2014, 02:44 AM
.357 sig is a proprietary round, and it makes them money. It also fits in within existing tooling. 38 super doesnt.

If they make a 45 ACP version, it does. The only difference would be the extractor, breech face cut on the slide, recoil spring and barrel. It would be fairly easy for manufactures to streamline their offerings to suit different calibers if they made three different slides (9x19/38 Super, 40S&W/10mm, 45ACP) and two different frames (large/small) If you look at Tanfoglio pistols you can take the slide from one pistol and put it on another because most parts are standardized between all the calibers. The 357 Sig is nice if you want to use a small frame, like the 45 GAP, but the 38 Super is better for large frame pistols.

goon
January 31, 2014, 04:07 AM
I think the short, stubby .357 SIG round also would have better ergonomics in a double stack pistol. The .38 Super is chambered in a few double stack guns, but not many. The only ones I've seen were purpose built 1911 style race guns.
Normal double stacks like the Glock 19/23, SIG P-226, or the Beretta 92 fit my hand pretty well, but those race guns were too big for me (I have hands on the large side, but not huge).

If you enjoyed reading about "Why .357 sig When there's 38 super" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!