.357Sig/.357Magnum

[FLA2760]

I am wondering if any of you have terminal ballistic information on the .357sig load out of a 4" barrel such as a Glock32. How does it compare to say a 125gr .357 magnum load out of a 4" revolver? I am considering a G32 for the house and carry when practical. I currently CCW a G27.
I thank you for your replys.

 

[MCgunner]

Well, with a 125 grain bullet and using standard factory ammo, both exceed 500 ft lbs out of 4" guns. That doesn't tell the tale for me of course. I can get 662 ft lbs out of a 2.3" SP101 using 180 grain bullets and my 140 grain carry loads pack as much punch as that 4" Sig when fired out of my SP101. I prefer the magnum round for its versatility, but then, I'm a revolver NUT to begin with. But, I hunt with and carry the .357 magnum. It's one of my favs. I'll probably never own a .357 Sig. Anything it will do, the .40 S&W will do far as self defense goes. I never really saw the point of the Sig other than marketing to departments that had been using the magnum for years. That don't mean it ain't a good round, though, and some prefer bottle neck rounds for reliable feeding which is valid IMHO, though I don't have any feeding problems with my 9s and .45ACP.

 

[doc2rn]

Using 148 gr FMJ out of the sig you get standard velocities equivalent to the 158 gr.357 magnum. Now for all the 40 haters I just put the 1500th round out of my Glock 32 this week and I have not had one feed jam or failure to extract. The ammo is a little pricey but speer now makes the Lawman training ammo in 125 gr for about $14/ 50.

 

[sd]

that was the whole point , as far as I understand it, for SIG to develop the round. Their express purpose ( other than sales) was to replicate the ballistics of the 125 gr. .357 Mag out of a 4" revolver in a auto cartridge.
The .357 Sig apparrently does that. It has been described as a " 9mm magnum " . Although the Sig round does not have the broad range that one can find in .357 mag loads , from what I've read the .357 Sig does have pretty impressive ballistics and penetration cability, especially compared to similiar sized autos in 9mm or 40 sw. But then again I may not know what I'm talking about.

From a winchester pamlet I have : .357 Mag 125 grain Muzzle velocity 1450
Muzzle energy 583

.357 Sig 125 grain Muzzle velocity 1350
Muzzle energy 506

again i'm no expert, just trying to help.

 

[FerFAL]

It was specially desinged to duplicate the 125 gr. 357 magnum, the best stopper evver according to most experts.
My Glock 31 pushes 125gr. JHP at over 1400 fps, very nice balistics.
Now, if you wants heavier bullets, the SIG is not for you, it was designed to duplicate the 125 gr., not heavier projectiles.

FerFAL

 

[40SW]

Don't get caught up in splitting hairs over the ballistics of each one, both are proven and excellent manstoppers. Although the .357SIG has a much shorter proven track record, prominant law enforcement and government agencies have adopted it with much success. I would not feel undergunned with either round.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

From the Remington site:
.357 Sig 125 gr bullet velocity 1350 fps w/506 ft/lbs of energy and drops 3" @ 100 yards.
.357 Mag 125 gr bullet velocity 1450 fps w/583 ft/lbs of energy and drops 2.8" @ 100 yards.
The Winchester and Federal site have the same numbers..

From the DoubleTap site:
.357 Sig 125 gr bullet velocity 1450 fps w/584 ft/lbs of energy.
.357 Mag 125 gr bullet velocity 1600 fps w/710 ft/lbs of energy.

IMO if you're considering a .357 Sig you should also consider the .38 Super. It's almost as powerful as the .357 Sig but offers many more choices in pistols to choose from including 1911's.

CarBon 125 gr .38 Super 1325 fps w/487 ft/lbs of energy.
Of course if you handload you can make a more potent round.

 

[MikePGS]

Yeah as you've already seen you tend to lose a couple hundred FPS. Also due to the bullet design the 357 sig supposedly won't expand as well (i'm not doubting this, i'm just saying that its from a second hand source). That being said, i think either cartridge would definitely be sufficient for SD purposes.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I have to agree, anything marked .357 can't be a bad thing.

 

[MCgunner]

IMO if you're considering a .357 Sig you should also consider the .38 Super. It's almost as powerful as the .357 Sig but offers many more choices in pistols to choose from including 1911's.

CarBon 125 gr .38 Super 1325 fps w/487 ft/lbs of energy.
Of course if you handload you can make a more potent round.

I'm not a 1911 guy nor am I gonzo over big and slow bullets, but in a 1911, you can get over 500 ft lbs with a +P Speer 200 grain .45ACP. Why would you want to go with a .38 Super? Ain't a lot of availablity of .38 super, either, for non-reloaders. I'd stick with .45 in a 1911 and not because of any bigger holes. JMHO, though.

 

[gandog56]

I have to agree, anything marked .357 can't be a bad thing.

The people who designed the round deliberately did not put a decimal point in front of the 357 in 357 Sig. Probably because it really is a 9mm bullet.

That said, I love mine. Cheaper to reload than my 40 S&W.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The people who designed the round deliberately did not put a decimal point in front of the 357 in 357 Sig.

If it's good enough for S&W, it's good enough for me. If you look on their site you will see a "dot" in front of all their caliber listings for the .357 Magnum!!