9mm vs 357mag
- Thread starter Styx
- Start date
mcb
Member
Yeah on average, assuming we are talking about quality ammo designed for self defense then I would expect both cartages to perform fairly similar in a self defense situation. Close enough that shot placement and target will matter more than the difference between the cartridges. Both cartridges have a long history of being proven to be good cartridges for self defense.
JTQ
Member
Right, but what are you asking the bullet to do, expand, penetrate, or produce an energy number?
OP
OP
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
JTQ
Member
Or .38 Super, or .40 S&W, or 10mm, or .45 Auto, or .44 Special, or .41 Magnum, or .44 Magnum, or .45 Colt, or ...
You can find just about any round that will fit into such parameters.
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
Penetration depth and expanded diameter are simply not the whole story when looking at magnum velocities. Wounding disproportional to the bullet diameter is possible with increased velocity. Then there's the ballistic wave theory, and some other stuff.
Point is, handgun hunting has proved (and disproved) a lot where handgun bullet wounding is concerned.
OP
OP
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
I don't know because I've never hunted. I think that when it comes to hunting using a handgun, they aren't using typical factory defensive ammo to be able to draw a comparison between different handgun calibers in that regard. I don't know for sure though, so I could be wrong.
Tinman357
Member
Intresting thread. I didn't learn anything about ballistics that I didn't already know, but I learned a lot about the variations of human perception.
The FBI set a benchmark, most ammo companies understandably designed ammo to reach that "standard" some calibers had to up their game with better bullet design and better performing powders. Others had to water things down a bit to avoid over performing the "standard".
I lean towards over performing ammo based on the platform its being fired from.
I get most of my dedicated SD ammo from Underwood or Buffalo Bore.
My thoughts from years of research is the debates between "light and fast" bullets vs "big, heavy, slow" bullets. Light and fast is good, speed matters. Big and heavy is good, mass matters.
My own personal conclusion, big, heavy, and as fast as possible. On the threat end of things, I want big bullets moving fast on the threat. On my end of things, I have to be able to carry it, effectively and accurately put those big heavy bullets on target. While I have no desire to kill anyone, I do see the wisdom of stopping the threat as fast as possible.
That's where my personal compromise and balancing percieved needs comes into play.
I own, and am proficient with several different sized sidearms and different calibers, all will "do the job" on paper. But I do tend towards the biggest pistol that I can conceal, the most accurate, and biggest/heaviest caliber. For me, that's an 8+1 1911 loaded with 230gn +P dold dot hp from Underwood. The capacity is limited, but I carry a few extra magazines.
Best for everyone? No. But it is for me.
Now, when I can get 50bmg 48" barreled performance from a 30 shot pocket pistol that fits in my shirt pocket, laser accurate out to 1000yds, zero recoil, easy to find ammo at 1 cent per round, and silent?
Then I'll be content.
Until then, the search for the perfect balance continues.
To answer the OP, the "best" 9mm will never match the "best" 357mag. But a top notch, modern 9mm fired out of a 16" barrel will exceed an old school 125gn hp 357mag out of a 4" pistol. I don't remember any LEO that carried 4" S&W 19 saying that the ammo wasn't enough. It was widely accepted as a top tier performer for decades.
The FBI set a benchmark, most ammo companies understandably designed ammo to reach that "standard" some calibers had to up their game with better bullet design and better performing powders. Others had to water things down a bit to avoid over performing the "standard".
I lean towards over performing ammo based on the platform its being fired from.
I get most of my dedicated SD ammo from Underwood or Buffalo Bore.
My thoughts from years of research is the debates between "light and fast" bullets vs "big, heavy, slow" bullets. Light and fast is good, speed matters. Big and heavy is good, mass matters.
My own personal conclusion, big, heavy, and as fast as possible. On the threat end of things, I want big bullets moving fast on the threat. On my end of things, I have to be able to carry it, effectively and accurately put those big heavy bullets on target. While I have no desire to kill anyone, I do see the wisdom of stopping the threat as fast as possible.
That's where my personal compromise and balancing percieved needs comes into play.
I own, and am proficient with several different sized sidearms and different calibers, all will "do the job" on paper. But I do tend towards the biggest pistol that I can conceal, the most accurate, and biggest/heaviest caliber. For me, that's an 8+1 1911 loaded with 230gn +P dold dot hp from Underwood. The capacity is limited, but I carry a few extra magazines.
Best for everyone? No. But it is for me.
Now, when I can get 50bmg 48" barreled performance from a 30 shot pocket pistol that fits in my shirt pocket, laser accurate out to 1000yds, zero recoil, easy to find ammo at 1 cent per round, and silent?
Then I'll be content.
Until then, the search for the perfect balance continues.To answer the OP, the "best" 9mm will never match the "best" 357mag. But a top notch, modern 9mm fired out of a 16" barrel will exceed an old school 125gn hp 357mag out of a 4" pistol. I don't remember any LEO that carried 4" S&W 19 saying that the ammo wasn't enough. It was widely accepted as a top tier performer for decades.
Last edited:
Monac
Member
Ok, I think I get it now: Ammunition designed to meet a common standard performs similarly, whether the box is marked 9mm or 357 Magnum. I am not sure what there is to discuss about that.
It seems to me that meeting that standard means pushing 9mm ammo really hard, so much so that it needs to be marked as "+P" or even "+P+", and that does not need to be done with with 357 Magnum. But that only matters if we are concerned about which guns can use +P or +P+ 9mm, and that is not the point under discussion. Per the OP: "Please let's leave capacity, ammo availability and cost, etc out of the discussion, and only focus on the performance and ballistic difference only."
In my long-winded post above, I misunderstood the OP's point, and was thinking in terms of the potential of each cartridge in general, not in a particular market segment. I apologize for wasting people's time as a result. I thought the OP was trying to say that 9mm and 357 Mag were now roughly equal.
PS - Some ammo company, maybe Norma, used to market a +P+ 38 Special load that was described as a "low-end 357 Magnum in a 38 Special case". (Not by the manufacturer, but by a writer somewhere. The phrase stuck in my mind.) If that ammo is still being made, we could get 38 Special into this discussion. And maybe 38 Super too. Then we could decide they are all pretty much the same. So would anything else be - if it was designed to meet this standard.
It seems to me that meeting that standard means pushing 9mm ammo really hard, so much so that it needs to be marked as "+P" or even "+P+", and that does not need to be done with with 357 Magnum. But that only matters if we are concerned about which guns can use +P or +P+ 9mm, and that is not the point under discussion. Per the OP: "Please let's leave capacity, ammo availability and cost, etc out of the discussion, and only focus on the performance and ballistic difference only."
In my long-winded post above, I misunderstood the OP's point, and was thinking in terms of the potential of each cartridge in general, not in a particular market segment. I apologize for wasting people's time as a result. I thought the OP was trying to say that 9mm and 357 Mag were now roughly equal.
PS - Some ammo company, maybe Norma, used to market a +P+ 38 Special load that was described as a "low-end 357 Magnum in a 38 Special case". (Not by the manufacturer, but by a writer somewhere. The phrase stuck in my mind.) If that ammo is still being made, we could get 38 Special into this discussion. And maybe 38 Super too. Then we could decide they are all pretty much the same. So would anything else be - if it was designed to meet this standard.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
What would be your choice in 357 mag?Intresting thread. I didn't learn anything about ballistics that I didn't already know, but I learned a lot about the variations of human perception.
The FBI set a benchmark, most ammo companies understandably designed ammo to reach that "standard" some calibers had to up their game with better bullet design and better performing powders. Others had to water things down a bit to avoid over performing the "standard".
I lean towards over performing ammo based on the platform its being fired from.
I get most of my dedicated SD ammo from Underwood or Buffalo Bore.
My thoughts from years of research is the debates between "light and fast" bullets vs "big, heavy, slow" bullets. Light and fast is good, speed matters. Big and heavy is good, mass matters.
My own personal conclusion, big, heavy, and as fast as possible. On the terminal end of things, I want big bullets moving fast on the threat. On my end of things, I have to be able to carry it, effectively and accurately put those big heavy bullets on target.
That's where my personal compromise and balancing percieved needs comes into play.
I own, and am proficient with several different sized sidearms and different calibers, all will "do the job" on paper. But I do tend towards the biggest pistol that I can conceal, the most accurate, and biggest/heaviest caliber. For me, that's an 8+1 1911 loaded with 230gn +P dold dot hp from Underwood. The capacity is limited, but I carry a few extra magazines.
Best for everyone? No. But it is for me.
Now, when I can get 50bmg 48" barreled performance from a 30 shot pocket pistol that fits in my shirt pocket, laser accurate out to 1000yds, zero recoil, easy to find ammo at 1 cent per round, and silent?
Then I'll be content.
Tinman357
Member
@Styx.
Underwood or Buffalo Bore 158gn jacketed HP would be my first choice for SD. My revolvers that are set up for CC are 3 & 4" and either of those two rounds deliver. Accurate too.
Hunting is a different matter all together.
. 6" heavy barrel gets 180gn solid flat points. Drives deep.
Underwood or Buffalo Bore 158gn jacketed HP would be my first choice for SD. My revolvers that are set up for CC are 3 & 4" and either of those two rounds deliver. Accurate too.
Hunting is a different matter all together.
. 6" heavy barrel gets 180gn solid flat points. Drives deep.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
It wasn't a waste of time. I am not an aficionado when it comes to ammo. I mostly go by ballistic numbers, recommendations, and live test on YouTube. I learned something from your post.
Now I need to find a reliable easy to obtain self defense 357 load that isn't neutered.
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
Look at the Hornady XTP for example. It is loaded in defensive ammunition, but also used for hunting. There is cross over. Also read this:
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.357+Magnum.html
OP
OP
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
Thanks
sgt127
Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,113
Also, quick note. The .357 Magnum has been downloaded since it originally came out. Then the 125 GR came out with impressive street results. When Smith K frames started cracking forcing cones, it seems all the ammo makers toned them down a bit.
The original load was a 158 gr lead semi wadcutter. At advertised 1500 fps. In real world, probably closer to 1400.
Super Vel came along and started the real trend towards lighter bullets at screaming velocities as, that was the rage in that era.
The original load was a 158 gr lead semi wadcutter. At advertised 1500 fps. In real world, probably closer to 1400.
Super Vel came along and started the real trend towards lighter bullets at screaming velocities as, that was the rage in that era.
You've just discovered why cops switched to 9mm.
You can cherry pick data to prove a lot of things. One thing to keep in mind is that there can be more than 100 fps difference between different guns with the same length barrels. Look at this 357 data. The 4" Smith 686 was about 40-60 fps faster than the 5" Smith 627 and about 80-100 fps faster than the 6" Colt with several different loads. If you choose your data from that individual revolver your conclusions are going to be far different than if you chose the Colt.
BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: .357 Mag Results
You can also cherry pick loads that give faster speeds than the norm.
Cherry pick an individual gun and load and you can show 357 as a lot better. But the real-world speeds from most common 125 gr 357 mag loads from 4" barrels that were carried by cops for decades, and proved to be very effective, are going to be virtually the same as 124 gr 9mm loads from a 4-4.5" barrel.
It isn't hard to get 1250 fps from a common 4.5" 9mm. 1300 fps from a 5" Beretta. That is military spec and about the same as the +p+ loads cops carry. This is also just about where 9mm has always been loaded to in the rest of the world. Traditionally 9mm loaded in the USA has been loaded far slower than its potential. It's only in recent years that that has changed.
When you go to 6" or longer barrels, especially with heavier bullets, 357 mag is in another league. But that is for hunters and not what we're discussing here.
You can cherry pick data to prove a lot of things. One thing to keep in mind is that there can be more than 100 fps difference between different guns with the same length barrels. Look at this 357 data. The 4" Smith 686 was about 40-60 fps faster than the 5" Smith 627 and about 80-100 fps faster than the 6" Colt with several different loads. If you choose your data from that individual revolver your conclusions are going to be far different than if you chose the Colt.
BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: .357 Mag Results
You can also cherry pick loads that give faster speeds than the norm.
Cherry pick an individual gun and load and you can show 357 as a lot better. But the real-world speeds from most common 125 gr 357 mag loads from 4" barrels that were carried by cops for decades, and proved to be very effective, are going to be virtually the same as 124 gr 9mm loads from a 4-4.5" barrel.
It isn't hard to get 1250 fps from a common 4.5" 9mm. 1300 fps from a 5" Beretta. That is military spec and about the same as the +p+ loads cops carry. This is also just about where 9mm has always been loaded to in the rest of the world. Traditionally 9mm loaded in the USA has been loaded far slower than its potential. It's only in recent years that that has changed.
When you go to 6" or longer barrels, especially with heavier bullets, 357 mag is in another league. But that is for hunters and not what we're discussing here.
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
So you're saying you need +P+ loads to get those velocities? Do you think my G43 is rated for 9mm +P+? What's the MAP on a +P+ load anyway? You think NATO ammo is loaded that hot with a 124gr?
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,274
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,274
I know the NATO loads are hotter than the 9mm's I was used to as a civilian. I thought they were 147 grain, though.
fxvr5
Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2017
- Messages
- 3,274
That's funny. Really.
You missed the important part, however. The data from the old days was the speed achieved in 8 3/4" and 8 3/8" barrels. The new ballistics as Remington shows are from a 4.0" vented barrel.
Oops!
sgt127
Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,113
Similar threads
- Locked
