40 S&W vs 357 Sig vs 45 ACP.

[BioDemon]

I have a 40 S&W and have been thinking of getting a 357 Sig barrel for it. My wife's 357 mag does seem to do more damage than my friends 45 acp in roles of wet news paper and to water jugs. At the range the 45 acp puts bigger holes in paper. My 40 S&W seems to fall in between the two. All Out of a 4" barrel the 357 125gr at around 1300-1400fps, The 40 S&W 155-165gr at 1100-1200fps, and the 45acp 230gr at 850-1000fps. http://stevespages.com/page8f.htm and
http://www.firearmstactical.com/ammo_data/ammodata.htm are some of the places I've gathered information on ballistics other than first hand experience. Please note: I'm comparing all with 4" barrels. So here it is again the small fast vs. heavy slow debate. I now the 45acp, 40s&w, and 357 are all good. All penetrate about 18"-20" of gelatin or Water with good HP bullets, I'm just wondering after blasting up water jugs, fruit, shooting into mud, and seeing first hand what fast little bullets do, why not a 357 Sig? When talking to people about stopping cougars or bears and I mention a 40 S&W they always say "WHAT, I'd WANT AT LEAST A 357 MAG !". Ya, for bear a 44mag or 50AE would be cool but I've got to decide 357 vs 40. I added the 45acp to make a point for heavy slow. The 45acp and 357mag are both legendary stoppers. I just wonder what's really better, 357sig or 40s&w?

 

[only1asterisk]

BD,

Less caffeine, more paragraphs.



David

 

[shield20]

From all that I have seen and read there is no real difference performance-wise between the calibers. The biggest diff. will probably come from barrier penetration, where the .45 seems to suffer the most.
Personally I like the bigger hole of the .45, and then the .40 over a .355 - you are not so dependent on expansion - (although with the latest bullet designs expansion is a bit more a sure thing) and +p ammo in .45 can get the fps up there if you are looking for more speed.

There are some cost and availability issues with the .357, and very limited round choice. Also remember one of the positives of the true .357 Mag was in its bullet design w/huge HP opening - you will not get that design to work in an auto, so you will not be getting quite the same performace, no matter what the numbers say.

Me? I would stick to the .40, seems to offer the best of everything, in the real world too, as long as its recoil isn't an issue for you - which is probably a mute point compared to the sig's kick and boom.

 

[BioDemon]

Thanks Shield, I realy don't mind the recoil at all of the 40 S&W. What your saying makes sence. Ya, a 45 +p is going to be about the best of the three but the gun I like the most for feel and shooting I must decide 40 S&W or 357 Sig. Thank's
One thing realy going for the 40 S&W I feel is mag cap over 45ACP atleast in the same sized frame.
Perhaps I should cut down on the caffeine.

 

[cla55ic]

I have at this time a S&W 4506 and a Springfield Armory XD-40. with a Sig Sauer STL9000L Tach light for home defense. I'm think of trading in my S&W 4506 I use for my conceled weapon for a .357 sig. but what manufacturer to pick from. Any Ideas?

 

[AK103K]

I have guns in all three calibers, and of the three, I prefer the 357SIG.

Its not hard to find, nor is it really any more expensive than .40 when bought in bulk, or when buying premium ammo. Both are still cheaper than .45acp, and all are more expensive than 9mm.

Lately though, I've reverted back to 9mm. As was mentioned, there really isnt a whole lot of difference between any of them performance wise, and the 9mm carries more ammo on board and is easier to shoot faster with. +P+ 9mm puts you right into the base commercial loaded 357SIG range too, if you want the extra zing.

 

[AK103K]

...but what manufacturer to pick from. Any Ideas?

I have both SIG's and a Glock 31 in the caliber. The Glock seems to be taking a beating with not all that many rounds through it. The SiG's on the other hand, show no signs of any extra wear, and they have a lot more rounds though them at this point too.

The underside of the slide on the 31 is getting pretty beat up where the locking block is impacting it, especially compared to my 17's, which show no wear at all. I've been told its common with both the 357SIG and the .40's, and not to worry about it, but its troublesome all the same. It doesnt appear to be leveling off, or at least not yet it hasnt.

The Glock is a little more lively when fired than the SIG's too, and doesnt seem to recover as quick either. No major difference, nor is it a problem, but its noticeable.

 

[m2steven]

My personal observations are that the 357 SIG and/or my Glock 32 is the most accurate combination of pistol and ammo I have. My own "research" (shooting bricks, concrete blocks, abandoned cars, etc) show the 357 sig to be the all-around best round in almost every regard.

There is something to be said for the large bullet of the 45. It IS apparently the best bowling pin round, and has proven to be so after years of people shooting pins.

Still, i'll take the 357 SIG over the 40 and 45 simply because it does great damage and really is a more accurate bullet at normal ranges. Plus, I have the equipment to reload this ammo so as to eventually reduce my expense.

 

[Colton White]

At the range the 45 acp puts bigger holes in paper

Bless your heart but, DUH

 

[Manco]

Some like small & fast (.357 SIG) while others like big & slow (.45 ACP), and some prefer to compromise (.40 S&W). Small & fast generally has more kinetic energy and does a number on many types of hard and dry materials as a result, while big & slow generally has greater momentum and is good at knocking things down (not people--smaller things ) and punching deep into wet materials. Personally, I went with .40 S&W because it has greater velocity than .45 ACP with the same sectional density, which makes it better at penetrating wet things (such as flesh) even if it doesn't knock down bowling pins quite as well, which I consider a positive trade-off. While .357 SIG, loosely based on the same case but necked-down, has some of its own advantages, the load selection is limited (unless you load your own) and I'm not convinced that small & fast wounds flesh better despite the impressive damage it does to other materials (until one gets to rifle calibers, anyway).

Don't get me wrong, I have faith in the overall effectiveness of all three calibers, as far as handguns go, anyway, but whatever .357 SIG does better, .40 S&W can do nearly as well, and the latter is probably the best overall at the most important aspects of terminal ballistics, in my opinion, and is the best all-around, as well, especially when you consider its advantage in capacity over .45 ACP. That said, how much difference is there, really? Not much, I think. It ultimately comes down to the individual load anyway, and .40 S&W happens to have more loads that I favor, but there are some good standard-pressure 9mm loads that I like, too, for that matter, so whatever.

 

[cla55ic]

What do all of think of the S&W MP .357 sig?

 

[MagnumDweeb]

My uncle got limited to five handguns by his wife, so two are Custom Caspian guns he built, one's a snub nose. The other two are XDs. He got them as .40s and converts them back through 9mm, .40, and Sig .357 without trouble using the dragon conversion barrels. It's made me want to get an XD .40 myself but I can't justify it right yet. The money I'd spend I could use to buy more commercial equipment.

But at the same time the Sig .357 gets the lighter grain loadings of the .357 magnum. The mantra as I understand it is, that you want grain loadings of 130 grain-110 grain for personal defense, and 142 grain or high for barrier penetration or large wild animal defense. Well I also understand by reading various folks commenting on the .357 magum that a 125 grain JHP pushed at 1400 fps is a heck of a man stopper. If you don't mind stout loadings then double tap is perfect, also Corbon in my opinion comes in close second with 100 grain pow'r ball being pushed at 1600fps out of a 4 inch barrel.

If you've already got a .40 in XD or glock and the money to spare but not the desire to buy another gun, why not get the conversion. When 9mm was dried up during the peak of the shortage, you could still find(and can still find) Sig .357 and .40 on the WW shelves.

Following my personal doctrine of, one gun for up close and personal SD, and another for SHTF reach out and touch someone defense, having a Sig .357 in either capactiy I don't think I would be underserved.

 

[Manco]

What do all of think of the S&W MP .357 sig?

I own an M&P40, and it's a great gun for that caliber--sort of like a Glock (although completely different inside) that got more things right, in my opinion. It has been totally reliable and practical for me, as well as one of the most comfortable pistols I've shot (taking into account its light weight and the sharpness of .40 S&W recoil). The M&P357 is the same gun with a different barrel and number on the side of the slide--either is convertible to the other with a simple barrel swap, and both can be converted to 9mm with a special conversion barrel and 9mm magazines (that's all it takes). .357 SIG rounds tend to have more blast and flash, as usual, but their recoil is very controllable on the M&P.

 

[MCgunner]

The Sig barrel would be a waste of money unless you just WANT it.

JMHO, but you can push as much energy with the lighter .40 loads. .45ACP is plenty, too, though you have to go with +P to push the energies up. I don't bother in .45, just shoot a 200 grain JHP at about 950 fps. I think that's plenty good and follow up shots are quicker with less muzzle flip. The load is quite accurate, what really matters to me. I don't get into cold sweats over caliber. Hell, most of the time, I carry 9x19 or 9x18 or .38 special +P being a pocket carry kinda guy.

 

[tipoc]

I just wonder what's really better, 357sig or 40s&w?

It will come down to a matter of preference, literally what you prefer to shoot.

There is, to me anyway, an edge to the .40. First it makes a slightly bigger hole. Second with the .40 a shooter can get a 135 gr. bullet going at 1300-1350 fps from a 4" barrel or a 155 gr. pill going at 1250-1300 fps. This is just a bit slower than the 125 gr. pill from the Sig at 1400 fps or so. But the .40 has a bigger and heavier bullet and this latter bit counts.

The .40 also has a wide range of bullet weights available from 135 to 180gr. or so and does well with most of those.

Keep in mind that there are no reliable tests or figures that indicate that the .357 Sig penetrates better than the .40 S&W. Or any other service rounds for that matter. Such penetration is more a matter of bullet construction and loads than caliber.

I think what it comes down to is the shooters preference.

Just my opinion.

tipoc

 

[saturno_v]

I like the versatility and the ideal compromise of the 40 S&W. A more compact pistol, more capacity on average, huge ammo selection.

If I really want more power I take my 10mm out of my safe....debate over!!

 

[breacher]

45 ballistics

try www.ballisticsbytheinch.com or something like that to see what various barrel lengths do for velocity

 

[CWL]

Buy what you like to shoot and which feels the best in your hands. That's it. You don't need to make it more difficult.

I have all the calibers you post about, but I like .45ACP. That's my preference so that's what I primarily shoot.

 

[easyg]

I like the .45ACP, but most .45 pistols either have too low of a magazine capacity or too fat of a grip for my hands.

So, I prefer the .40S&W and the .357Sig.
You really can't go wrong with either one of these calibers.
But there is one thing to consider:
The .357Sig was designed to replicate the effectiveness of the 125g .357 magnum round from a 4" barrel handgun.
So, if you're shooting the .357Sig from a 4" barrel handgun, then you're going to get the most from it.
But if you're shooting it from a 3" barrel, you're not really getting the performance intended by the designers, and you would probably be better off going with the .40S&W.

 

[Shadan7]

Thanks, breacher, our tests helped confirm my earlier conclusions: .357 Sig if I want something small and really fast, or .45 if I want something larger and slower.

.40's probably fine, but seems something of a "neither fish or fowl" solution.

Jim D.

 

[JimKirk]

Don't over look the 357 SIG Corbon 125 DPX load. My Glock 31 feeds them well and they have a heck of a hole in the end of them. They are my SD load and would be my bear load if I were in bear country.

Jimmy K

 

[Manco]

Thanks, breacher, our tests helped confirm my earlier conclusions: .357 Sig if I want something small and really fast, or .45 if I want something larger and slower.

Then I guess you tend toward opposing extremes. If the question is which philosophy is really more effective, then you'll either benefit if you figured right or suffer if you figured wrong. For those who can't decide, something in the middle might suit them just fine.

.40's probably fine, but seems something of a "neither fish or fowl" solution.

Well, you could look at it that way, as neither, or as both a bit of fish and a bit of fowl, sort of like a flying piranha. Seriously, detractors have often made .40 S&W seem like a bunch of disadvantages with no advantages, saying that it has less capacity than 9mm and a smaller diameter than .45 ACP, while supporters have said that it has greater capacity than .45 ACP and a larger diameter than 9mm--all true statements but from two completely different perspectives. Similarly, you could say that it either excels at nothing or is bad at nothing (and therefore good at everything, giving full coverage of all capabilities at this level).

That said, rather than relying on one's personality or personal philosophy, just make a prioritized list of criteria that are important to you (not consisting only of terminal ballistics but also things like capacity and grip size), and mark off which caliber does what better than the others. Use real examples in doing so--actual tests in ballistic gelatin or other representative media, and actual handguns that you need to be comfortable with and be able to shoot well. Factor in your personal biases or desires if you must. Hopefully after going through this process, the answer will become clear.

 

[tipoc]

neither fish nor fowl

One way of looking at it. Another is that it is versatile.

If folks go over to "Ballistics by the Inch" and compare the results from actual handguns and consider the larger and heavier rounds from the .40 it pops up ahead of the Sig round in terms of both energy and momentum. While the .40 is not "small and fast", it is mid sized and fast (on average about 50 to 75 feet slower than the Sig round but with a heavier larger pill).

If we look at the velocity and energy figures from offerings by Cor-Bon, Buffalo Bore, Double Tap and others the .40 again tends to best the .357 Sig in a number of ways.

I'd recommend you get both in a gun or guns you like. The actual selling point of the .357 Sig seems to be that it can be used easily in switch barrel guns. Decide for yourself which you prefer in what bullet weights. May help get past the hype that it penetrates better than any other service caliber gun.

tipoc

 

[Harvey]

It would seem that the OP, BioDemon, has lost interest. Or lost something. But by all means carry on the chat.