.357 vs .40SW

[Usmc-1]

As far as raw power the 357 smokes the 40 and I gotta say I prefer the 357 , now I dont mind the 40 but it reminds me too much like a 9 and that reminds me of a 22 , so there , now I do like the 10mm , if there ever was a round that was the same but really isnt , its the 10mm (40sw)

I would think coming from the reloaders on here the story might be a tad different as they can pretty much make the power or speed happen the way they want!

I shouldve started a post 10 vs 40 , but I like the 40 its just I believe in a firefight the 357 has the advantage!

 

[Effigy]

I assume you mean .357 SIG? Haven't shot it personally, but it always sounded interesting.

 

[MrWesson]

also as a reloader necked cartridges(357 sig) are a pain the rear.

IMO .40 vs .357 sig is a wash.

Gold dot data is within 4ft lbs of energy for 155gr .40 vs 125gr .357 sig(same bullet)

 

[lucentlackey]

Why quibble when you can have them both. My brother just picked this up at Buds Gun Shop:
SIG SAUER P250 .40 CALIBER COMPACT

INCLUDES SIG LITE NIGHT SIGHTS!

INCLUDES THREE (3)-13 ROUND MAGAZINES!

INCLUDES AN EXTRA .357 SIG BARREL USED BY FEDERAL AGENCY DURING T&E.

SUPER-SMOOTH DAO TRIGGER SYSTEM!

He loves it and I hope to shoot it this weekend. Swap barrels to match your mood!

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/411544162

 

[Manco]

As far as raw power the 357 smokes the 40 and I gotta say I prefer the 357 , now I dont mind the 40 but it reminds me too much like a 9

.357 SIG (if that's what you're talking about) reminds me of 9mm, too, regarding the size of the bullet, and oddly enough it is reminiscent of .40 S&W based on the size of the case. They're just not all that different, really.

As for power, in terms of kinetic energy .40 S&W comes pretty close to .357 SIG--the latter will penetrate hard barriers a little better, while the former will make slightly bigger holes, there you go.

and that reminds me of a 22 , so there ,

.357 SIG should, too, because all it does is punch little holes in things (which can kill people, mind you, but .22 can also do that).

 

[gofastman]

.357 sig should, too, because all it does is punch little holes in things

exactly!

 

[Effigy]

.357 SIG (if that's what you're talking about) reminds me of 9mm, too, regarding the size of the bullet, and oddly enough it is reminiscent of .40 S&W based on the size of the case. They're just not all that different, really.

I think you're right on the money. From my understanding, .357 SIG is a 9mm bullet in a necked-down .40 S&W case. In that sense it's the spiritual successor to the .357 Mag, but in a semi-auto cartridge.

 

[BENBRU]

also as a reloader necked cartridges(357 sig) are a pain the rear.

I've never understood this. I reload all my own .357 Sig and haven't had too much of a problem. I must be crazy... I've been told this a lot and I've never had a misfire, or a squib, and the brass I'm missing is because my Sig 229 throws it into bushes. It's not a whole lot different than reloading rifle cartridges. Yes, I lube the cartridges, and yes it takes a little bit longer but I don't qualify it as a pain in the rear. You have to use flat nose .355 diameter bullets because of the short neck on the cartridge.

I like the 357 Sig. Not a handful to shoot, in my experience is more reliable (I have a 40 S&W barrel for my 229 and have experienced a higher instance, around 1 in 300, than I do with the 357 Sig which has NEVER failed to cycle or gotten hung up in over 3000rds) and moves a hell of a lot faster. I've chrono'd rounds at about 1540fps, the pow'r'ball rounds tout 1600fps out of a 4in barrel though it is only a 90gr bullet.

The argument is really a wash though. I like shooting the 357 Sig. It makes a hell of a racket and is somewhat unique. To each his own, your mileage may vary, and such.

 

[RhinoDefense]

The 357 SIG was developed to match the 357 Mag 125gr JHP but in a pistol instead of a revolver. It accomplishes that and that's where the performance similarity ends.

The 357 SIG is a 40 S&W necked down to accept .355 bullets and shoulder radius formed.

The 40 S&W is a shortened 10mm Auto case but with a small primer instead of a large.

The 9x25 Dillon is the 10mm Auto necked down to accept .355 bullets and shoulder radius formed.

If you want to talk ballistics, the 40S&W will never be a 10mm Auto and the 357 SIG will never be a 357 Magnum, save for the 125gr load. The 9x25 is more of a competition cartridge by development than a defense or hunting cartridge. The 10mm Auto is more versatile than the 40 S&W. The 357 Magnum is more versatile than the 357 SIG.

 

[Sunray]

The .357 what? The SIG? Maximum? Magnum?
"...reminds me too much like a 9..." A 9 what? The .357 Sig is a 9mm.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

if there ever was a round that was the same but really isnt , its the 10mm (40sw)

Maybe that's because S&W created the 40 S&W by cutting down the 10mm... For the most part you can get almost the same performance in the 40 S&W as the 10mm with the same bullet weight. (well, almost)

IMO the .357 Sig is just as good as the 40 S&W with lighter bullets. If you want heavier bullets (165gr) the 40 S&W is better. The .357 Sig has a reputation of being more accurate than the 40 S&W.

 

[Usmc-1]

OK,OK, thanks for the response ,I didnt make this up I have a friend who wanted to see what was posted regarding this round , thanks , I dont have a use for the sig , just like gap round , theres no use for it ! I will say I thought about the sig in the Sig 250 , because of the barrel conversions , but I really dont think SIG did there homework on that gun , its full of flaws , good luck to your friend , but that gun might get him killed!

How about the .357 mag vs the 10 mm ? I realize reloaders are the real experts on loads ,so what about factory loads for these two rounds?

 

[MrWesson]

Yes, I lube the cartridges, and yes it takes a little bit longer but I don't qualify it as a pain in the rear. You have to use flat nose .355 diameter bullets because of the short neck on the cartridge.

The time itself can make it a pain in the rear. I don't know about you but I shoot quite a bit of pistol rounds per month and don't want to spend more of my free time lubing cases and loading them.

.357 sig is a great round and I think it is worth loading/shooting to some people.. just not me.

 

[Manco]

Maybe that's because S&W created the 40 S&W by cutting down the 10mm... For the most part you can get almost the same performance in the 40 S&W as the 10mm with the same bullet weight. (well, almost)

Let me try to put things into perspective with a few examples for comparison. In general note that .40 S&W performance is customarily measured with 4 inch test barrels, while 10mm performance is usually measured with 5-6 inch test barrels.

The typical 180 grain .40 S&W defense load these days pretty closely matches the 10mm FBI load, which was 180 grains @ 950 fps (out of a longer barrel, which means that in practice .40 S&W is a bit more powerful). Most 10mm defense loads from the major manufacturers are close as well (a little more velocity measured out of longer barrels). On a side note, they're all a good approximation of the original black powder .38-40 WCF caliber from the Old West.

Jeff Cooper originally specified a 200 grains @ 1000 fps load for the Bren Ten 10mm pistol, which happens to closely resemble Elmer Keith's 210 grains @ 950 fps police load in .41 Magnum. .40 S&W is not far off in its regular heavy-bullet loads, and can meet or exceed those standards with hot 200 grain loads such as the following: http://www.swampfoxgunworks.com/swampfox/product.php?productid=17641&cat=319&page=1.

Currently, the most powerful 10mm defense load from a major manufacturer (that I know of) is 175 grains @ 1290 fps out of a 5.5" barrel. This is fairly close to the original 10mm Norma loads, which are 170 grains @ 1300 fps and 200 grains @ 1200 fps out of a 5" barrel (I think). For comparison, .40 S&W can achieve 180 grains @ 1200 fps out of a stock 4.5" barrel, which isn't bad (about 90% of their momentum and energy)--although it takes a hot load (at standard pressure, not +P), those are "real" benchmark 10mm loads being compared, not light loads.

I'm not saying that .40 S&W can match 10mm's potential by any means, as it is, after all, a cut-down 10mm, but there is substantial overlap between them with regard to loads designed for certain purposes. Essentially the same goes for .357 SIG vis-à-vis .357 Magnum with regard to common defensive loads. Which is better depends on whether you prefer smaller & faster or bigger & slower.

 

[RhinoDefense]

To answer your question between .357 Magnum and 10mm, they are ballistic twins in practical performance from their respective weapons, though technical ballistics suggests the 10mm has more ROI (return on investment) than the .357 Magnum, due to the way barrels are measured [ie revolvers do not include the cylinder, which is the chamber, however pistols include the chamber in their barrel length measurement]. The pistol barrel is shorter in actuality than a revolver barrel since the measurement includes the chamber of the barrel in a pistol, but not in a revolver.

The FBI's 10mm Automatic load is a 180gr JHP at 980fps from a 5 inch barrel. They still have 10mm Automatic weapons in arsenal and are issued to their agents in certain scenarios. The .40 S&W will never be a 10mm. I have 10mm loads that are under SAAMI MAP that will blow the .40 S&W out of the water no matter how close you get to SAAMI MAP.

 

[stinger 327]

The Glock 23 .40 S & W Caliber kicks alot more than the .357 S & W Mod. 66.