357 sig Vs. 40


PDA






phantomak47
June 25, 2004, 03:58 PM
Which is the better round and why? Does anyone think that the 357 sig is here to stay or that it will slowly die out? what would you pick and why???

If you enjoyed reading about "357 sig Vs. 40" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
DoubleAction
June 25, 2004, 04:30 PM
No doubt, the .40 S&W cartridge has created a marketable force in the semi-automatic handgun industry, which I doubt will go away any time soon. As for the 357 sig; Some calls it the most powerful 9mm on the market, others call it the 125 gr., semi-auto version of the 357 magnum, using a bullet diameter of .355".
For every pistol I have chambered in the .40 S&W, I have a conversion barrel in the 357 sig. Big difference in the velosity behind the 357 sig, as compared to the .40 S&W. The smaller diameter bullet of the 357 sig has a much flatter trajectory than the .40 S&W, making it capable of extreme accuracy at longer distances while maintaining it's penetration strength to pierce the skin of an average vehicle. The .40 is an excellent larger diameter option to the 9mm for defense, while the 357 sig fills the option for those looking for a semi-auto alternative to the revolver's .357 magnum, in a compact or personnal size pistol.

threefeathers
June 25, 2004, 04:53 PM
For years I eschewed the 9mm, having it only in my High Power. I like the 45 ACP for most apps. However, I am now carrying a Sig 229 om 357 Sig. It is unbeliebably accurate to 50 meters and probably beyond while being very controlable.

Zircon
June 25, 2004, 09:17 PM
Like DoubleAction said, why limit yourself to one or the other? Many pistols can be converted with a simple barrel swap. I do believe the .357 Sig is a bit more accurate, even within 50 feet. Not much difference in recoil between the two rounds IMHO.

mrapathy2000
June 26, 2004, 03:07 AM
357sig fills a small niche. if they made 115gr and 125gr bullets for 40S&W 357sig would be somewhat more obsolete. lighter bullets in 40S&W shoot flatter. 40S&W bullets availible from 135gr to 200gr.

357sig is not the most powerfull 9mm. if you look at a good handloader book you will find tons of 9mm caliber cartridges for pistols that you dont see around at stores. new 9mm came out believe 9x25 basicly 10mm knecked down to 9mm smokes 357sig.

9mm +p/+p+ wont match 357sig it comes short though you get more bullets. 40S&W you can get 135gr bullet pushing 1300fps and 500ft lbs energy or 155gr bullet pushing 1200fps and 500ft lbs energy.

357sig doesnt have much room for expansion. 9mm luger/parabellum has been out over 100 years.

357sig can expand to .41-.42+ though entrance will be 9mm. .40 can expand to .45-.46+

though thats if the jhp opens up at all. 40S&W penetration is pretty consistent in testing. 9mm is all over the place.

plenty of 9mm cartridges have come and gone I think 357sig could be another one of them or it could replace 9mm luger/parabellum. 9mm luger/para is getting into smaller and smaller guns.

dont limit yourself to just one caliber. try em all.

Sylvilagus Aquaticus
June 26, 2004, 04:20 PM
I've carried my P229 in 357sig for several years now. The Texas DPS and Dallas PD liked it well enough to adopt it.

I like the caliber because it's fast, accurate, it feeds reliably due to the bottleneck case, and it tears the hell out of what it hits.

Personally, I don't care for the .40S&W, but I have experience with it. It's just a 'me' thing. YMMV. Use what you like and what you're comfortable and capable with.

Regards,
Rabbit.

Marshall
June 27, 2004, 01:16 AM
You need one of each anyway so, pick your favorite gun for each. Or, as others have said, buy one gun that shoots both.

wildehond
June 27, 2004, 06:08 AM
mrapathy2000

lighter bullets in 40S&W shoot flatter.

What do you base this on. The 40S&W has bigger frontal area. It will also create more turbulence which translates to more drag. This means that you need more energy to 'push' the projectile through the air.

This is the same reason the 375 H&H penetrates an elephant sckull without fishtailing. Where the 458 Win MAG thends the fishtail and sometimes gives inediquate penetration.

wildehond

jc2
June 27, 2004, 08:29 AM
A little bad info here:
I've carried my P229 in 357sig for several years now. The Texas DPS and Dallas PD liked it well enough to adopt it.
While the Texas DPS adopted the 357 SIG several years ago, the Dallas PD did not. In a head to head competition, the Dallas PD selected the 9x19 Ranger T (RA9T) over the 357 SIG as their issue round.
I like the caliber because it's fast, accurate, it feeds reliably due to the bottleneck case, and it tears the hell out of what it hits.
While the 357 SIG tends to feed reliably, so does the 9x19, .40 S&W, .45 ACP. The bottle-neck design of the 357 SIG offers no advantages in terms of feed reliablity, but rather has a differerent set of feeding issues due to its design. The 357 SIG is a good, effective round, but it does not "tear the hell out of what it hits" any better than the 9x19. In fact, the 9x19 and 357 SIG consistently deliver the same permanent (crush) cavity. On the other hand, the .40 S&W consistently delivers a larger permanent (crush) cavity than the 357 SIG so, in fact, the .40 S&W "tears the hell out of what it hits" somewhat better than the 357 SIG.

355sigfan
June 27, 2004, 06:22 PM
357sig doesnt have much room for expansion. 9mm luger/parabellum has been out over 100 years.

357sig can expand to .41-.42+ though entrance will be 9mm. .40 can expand to .45-.46+
END QUOTE

Maybe I am reading your post wrong. But the best 9mm and 357 sig loads expand from .65 to .70 caliber. The best 40 caliber rounds go from about .65 to about .75. Its not all that much different. I prefer the 357 sig to the 40sw because of the accuracy. Also a 125 grain 40 load would suck. It would be a flying pancake. Penetration would be horrible.

But to be honest with the advent of good +p+ 9mm ammo like the WInchester Ranger 127 grain load at 1250. Neither the 40sw nor the 357 sig offer much more terminal performance. They also have some negatives attached to their extra power.

Pat

Sylvilagus Aquaticus
June 27, 2004, 06:47 PM
<cough>

mrapathy2000
June 27, 2004, 08:12 PM
when I said 357sig doesnt have much room for expansion I meant in terms of load offerings. I will grant 40S&W is not going anywhere really new with loads though it could get a 115gr or 125gr load little improvement in speed and energy over 135gr doing 1300fps -1500fps maybe lighter recoil in slightly lower gr. 357sig is limited to whats out for 9mm already. 50gr special bullets to 147gr loads. 357sig might have 150gr or 155gr load but it wouldnt offer much over 147gr.

mag safe ammo inc manufactures 40S&W bullets quite a bit lower gr than 125/115. though use way different materials Im sure.

http://yp.bellsouth.com/sites/magsafeammo/page3.html

40 S&W #40D Defender 84gr 1,800fps/604fpe-Glock 22 Light recoil

40 S&W #40 SWAT Load 46gr 2,100fps/451fpe-Glock 22 Lightest recoil!

.40 S&W-NEW #40G Mini-Glock Load 72gr 1,940fps/601 ft-lbs in Glock M27

one 357sig load

357 SIG #357SIG Defender 64gr 2,150fps/657 ft-lbs in SIG 229. Low recoil and flash

odd ammo looks like conservative loads then again looks like they want light recoil low flash otherwise sure they could do more with 40 as long as theyre bullets could take it.
probably use same bullets for 10mm.

lower gr bullets in 40S&W shoot flatter than the heavier weight bullets. 135-150-155-165-175-180-190-200

I would love to see a penetration comparison of a 115/125gr .400 bullet vs 115/125gr .355.out of 357sig sure the .355 would do better in penetration. doubt it would be much.

DMK
June 27, 2004, 08:49 PM
I wish the pistol world would have avoided all the .40S&W/.357Sig sillyness and just stuck with 10mm. It seems to me that the holy grail was/is .357 Magnum in a semi-auto. Well, the .357 is tremendously versatile round. You have rounds of all sorts of power levels with bullets ranging from 110gr, through 125gr, 158gr, and 180gr. The industry could have stuck with 10mm and developed different loads to meet the desired parameters of different needs just like they did with .357. Instead they went and invented a whole bunch of one trick wonders and 10mm, which had the potential be the semi-auto equivelent of the .357 magnum, got pushed to the sidelines.

355sigfan
June 27, 2004, 09:05 PM
I would love to see a penetration comparison of a 115/125gr .400 bullet vs 115/125gr .355.out of 357sig sure the .355 would do better in penetration. doubt it would be much
END QUOTE

No problem. A 135 grain Corbon 40sw load averages about 9 to 10 inches of penetration. A 125 grain 357 sig Corbon load averages about 12 inches. A 125 grain Gold dot goes 14 to 16 inches. There is no 135 grain gold dot for the 40sw. 135 grains is getting a bit too light for the 40sw as far as sectional density goes.
Pat

mrapathy2000
June 27, 2004, 10:06 PM
ammolab has had different results then yours with 135gr corbon powerball. 14" average +/- 1 inch

out of glock27 with 3.5" barrel

they also have 357sig results with 4" barrel all over the place. lowest is 7 inch though more consistently 12-14 quite a few going 18+.

355sigfan
June 27, 2004, 10:08 PM
ammolab has had different results then yours with 135gr corbon powerball. 14" average +/- 1 inch
END QUOTE

I did not list powerball results so the results could not have been different than mine.
Pat

Telperion
June 27, 2004, 10:14 PM
One thing to consider in 9mm +P vs. .40/357 is that +P loads will pound your gun harder. The .40/357 pistols are built to take more of a beating as a matter of course (for example, Sigarms switched from stamped to billet slides for the .40/357 models).

355sigfan
June 27, 2004, 10:41 PM
One thing to consider in 9mm +P vs. .40/357 is that +P loads will pound your gun harder. The .40/357 pistols are built to take more of a beating as a matter of course (for example, Sigarms switched from stamped to billet slides for the .40/357 models).

END QUOTE

Sorry thats not quite true. The slide velocity on a +p+ 9mm round is no where near as fast as a 357 sig round or a 40sw round. The 40sw and 357 sig guns are simply 9mm guns rechambered for the more powerfull calibers. They were only strengthened in areas that they had to be so they would not fall apart. The service life of a typical 40sw or 357 sig firearm is shorter than a 9mm firearm fired with nothing but the hottest +p+ ammo.
Pat

SpikeEVO
June 28, 2004, 08:04 AM
The 40sw and 357 sig guns are simply 9mm guns rechambered for the more powerfull calibers. They were only strengthened in areas that they had to be so they would not fall apart.

This isn't quite true either in all cases in my opinion, ie in the case of my SIG-SAUERs at least, guns like the 9mm P226 and P228 and P225 get rolled steel ("lightweight") slides since that is all that is needed for the little 9mm pressures, where .40/.357 P226s and the P229 and P239 get the much heavier forged stainless slides that noticeably weight down the gun.

I definitely know that in holding my P226 and P239, the little 239 is as heavy as the fullsize 9mm P226. I would much rather have a P225 or P228 weighted .40 from SIG, but I know this is not going to happen, to get the .40 you have to carry around the extra weight of the heavy stainless slide in the P229 and P239 or the guns will self destruct.

I believe KAHRs and Hi-Powers are similar, with a different and noticeably heavier slides to withstand the far greater slide velocity.

So I guess you could say that as long as the gun is originally designed to shoot either 9mm or .40/.357 then the gun doesn't need to be strengthened (ie P239, P229)... it will likely just be heavier than a 9mm only equivalent design...

But if the gun was originally designed only for 9mm (ie P225, P228, P226, HiPower), then it is going to likely need a good bit of rework (a newly designed slide, usually as the minimum) and usually become notieceably heavier before it becomes a .40/.357

Just my opinion, you certainly don't have to agree.

Sean Smith
June 28, 2004, 09:14 AM
guns like the 9mm P226 and P228 and P225 get rolled steel ("lightweight") slides since that is all that is needed for the little 9mm pressures

9x19 and .40 S&W have the same SAAMI spec for Mean Average Pressure: 35,000 psi. ;)

SpikeEVO
June 28, 2004, 09:25 AM
good point, insert "puny 9mm slide velocity" there instead ;)

ny32182
June 28, 2004, 09:57 AM
Sig went to the milled stainless slide, heavier recoil spring, and beefed up lockup for the .40/.357 models as far as I know. I believe it is the most completely rebuilt .40 on the market that was originally a 9.

I remember reports of Beretta 96's wearing out after 10K rounds, but not the .40 P226.

jc2
June 28, 2004, 11:51 AM
Spike -
This isn't quite true either in all cases in my opinion, ie in the case of my SIG-SAUERs at least, guns like the 9mm P226 and P228 and P225 get rolled steel ("lightweight") slides since that is all that is needed for the little 9mm pressures, where .40/.357 P226s and the P229 and P239 get the much heavier forged stainless slides that noticeably weight down the gun.
You are putting out some bad information here. The 9x19 P226 has a forged stainless slide just like the .40 S&W and 357 SIG versions. Of course, the 9x19 versions of the P229 and P239 have forged stainless slides as well. I think if you do a little checking, you find that even with +P+ (which you do NOT have to go to equal 357 SIG performance) the 9x19 still has considerably less slide velocity than the 357 SIG. I doubt seriously you'd shoot a P228 to pieces even with +P+ 9x19 any quicker than you would a P229 with 357 SIGs--and even then, it would be the frames that would go not the slide.

Of course, that's SIGs. There are no differences between the Glock 9x19 frames and slides and the Glock .40 S&W/357 SIG frames and slides. You would definitely shoot a G31 (357 SIG) to pieces much, much quicker than a G17 (even with nothing but +P+ ammo).

ny32182
June 28, 2004, 02:11 PM
I believe Sig switched to milled stainless slides for the 9x19 models at the same time that it introduced the milled slide .40 model, for which the milled slide was designed. Before that, the 9x19 sigs had rolled/stamped slides.

The .40/.357 milled slide will not accept a factory 9mm barrel though. I think the .40/.357 milled slide is still heavier than the 9mm milled slide. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

Also, the hotest 9x19 ballistics are still short of .357sig.

jc2
June 28, 2004, 02:57 PM
Yes, SIG changed the slides to forged on the P226 in calibres when they introduced it in the .40 S&W/357 SIG.

As for the ballistics, the 357 SIG does run a little hotter than the 9x19, but not enough to make any difference in effectiveness. They deliver virtually identical permanent (crush) cavities, and both are proving equally effective in actual LE use. And while, yes, there is a differences, there's just not enough difference between them to make a difference. There seems to be only so much you can do with .36 calibre 124/125 JHP out of a 9x19 size handgun, and both the 9x19 and the 357 SIG seem to be doing it.

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