Glock and the .357 Sig...

[MisterG]

I've been considering getting a Glock 19 but I saw a Glock ad for the .357 they sell and it mentioned that the .357 Sig is as powerful or more powerful as the .357 Magnum. Now I assume they are juggling some numbers or looking at things in a way as to make that statement true. My question, or one of them is, if they can make a gun to handle the pressures and stress of a 357 Magnum, why not just chambed it for that round? Why come up with another kind of bullet? Also, considering .357 Sig as a carry gun, how does it compare to a 9 mm, 40, or .45? Please educate me. Thank you.

 

[bofe954]

I'll post on this since no one else has yet, but I promise you'll get better info from some 357 sig enthusiasts soon...

The .357 sig as far as I know is kind of a derivative of the 40 S+W. To put it very simply think if it as a 40 case crimped down on a 9mm bullet.

The problem with putting 357 mag in semiauto pistols has more to do with the shape of the brass and the length than it does "withstanding the pressures and stress of 357 mag".

Big issues with 357 sig in my mind are lack of cheap and easy Wal-Mart ammo coupled with more difficult reloading. I am sure the ballistics are more than adequate for a carry gun.

I haven't thought much about them as I have been trying to limit the calibers that I have to shop for.

 

[jc2]

I've been considering getting a Glock 19 but I saw a Glock ad for the .357 they sell and it mentioned that the .357 Sig is as powerful or more powerful as the .357 Magnum. Now I assume they are juggling some numbers or looking at things in a way as to make that statement true.

They're not "juggling some numbers"--it's more like an outright fabrication. The 357 SIG is pretty much a "one pony show"--and that's a 125-grain bullet at about 1350 fps. That falls anywhere from a 100 to 250 fps slower than comparable bullet weight in the .357 Magnum. The 125-grain bullet is a light for the .357 Magnum. It easily handles 145, 158, 165 and 180 grain bullets. In fact, you purchase factory 158-grain .357 Magnum ammo hotter (more MV/ME) than the 125-grain loads for the 357 SIG. Comparing the 357 SIG to .357 Magnum is just creative (very, very creative) marketing.

Also, considering .357 Sig as a carry gun, how does it compare to a 9 mm, 40, or .45?

The 357 SIG delivers 9x19 performance/effectiveness--nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in some loadings the 9x19 outperforms the 357 SIG in penetration and expansion--what REALLY counts.

 

[Grump]

Coonan, Wildey (I think), Grizzly, and Magnum Research (the Desert Eagle folks) have all make semiautos for .357 Magnum. The revolver cartridge's case is so long, the grip must be very deep front-to-back. They are generally considered unwieldy for carry use, though some do hunt with 'em.

.357 SIG was designed only to compete with the .357 Mag in the 125-gr bullet weight. You might call it a "limited application" round, rather than a "do it all" job like the .357 almost is.

I'm quite impressed by so many reports of outstanding accuracy in the .357 SIG. .40 S&W kinda bites rocks quite frequently in that respect. I got really, really spoiled learning handguns from a Bullseye shooter.

 

[JohnKSa]

jc pretty much nailed it. If they said it was more powerful that's incorrect.

If they said it was AS powerful then that's within the realm of excusable for an advertisement but it needs some more information to be really correct. The 125 gr .357SIG loading has virtually identical ballistics to the 125gr .357 Mag loading. That's it. Most any decent .357Mag can be loaded hotter than that--in fact it's possible to get a 140 something grain bullet going over 1400fps. The Mag can also handle bullets up to around 180 grains--that's something that's never going to happen in the SIG.

To be fair, the .357SIG does what it was designed to do--duplicate (or at least come very close to) the 125gr @ 1450fps .357Mag load.

Think of the .357SIG as a 9mm+P+. That's not quite correct since with a 124 grain bullet the 9mm, even in +P+ will peter out before 1400fps in a handgun, but it's close.

 

[Fiero]

MisterG,

For the reasons you specified you are interested in the SIG round, you are much better off with the Glock 20 in 10mm. The round is definetely more powerful than either the .40 S&W or the .357 SIG and in a much safer package for reloading. Both the .40 S&W or the .357 SIG are meant to be attenuated derivatives of the 10mm round, created for marketing reasons to law enforcement. For practical consideration of a civilian, I'd much rather go with effective, rather than politically correct. .357 Magnum is a cartridge which makes DA's and cops look upon the user as a demon wannabe dirty harry if ever you are in a situation where your RKBA or action of self defense is questioned. 10mm is still a low profile anomaly that gets you max firepower in that caliber, without the negatives. Another great attribute of the Glock 20 is the ability to shoot .40 S&W with a simple barrel changeout.

 

[Ivy Mike]

Choose a bullet because it is effective, not because of what a DA might think or try to pull off in court. Any loaded question can be defused without incriminating ones self. You can answer it creatively or at the very least, tell the judge that you can't answer that question honestly because it is looking for a specific answer.

One way to avoid the whole mess is to carry the round your local PD uses. You could also go by what the FBI uses. That is a great way to shoot down a lawyer question about insta-death, cop killing, baby slaughtering, dum dum razor sharp fish hook talon bullets and why you shot his escaped convict client with one (or more)

.357Sig doesn't do much that a 9mm or .40 won't. It's a bit faster than 9mm and .40. It penetrates hard targets a bit better and has more energy. 10mm does all of this and does it better. 10mm is balistically better than .357 Magnum as well.

 

[jc2]

10mm is balistically better than .357 Magnum as well.

Not really. With current factory ammuniton, the hottest .357 Magnum loads are just a little (very little) hotter than the hottest 10mm loads. For all practical purposes, they are ballistic twins--it's just a matter of do you want a wheelgun or a bottom-feeder.

.357 Magnum is a cartridge which makes DA's and cops look upon the user as a demon wannabe dirty harry if ever you are in a situation where your RKBA or action of self defense is questioned. 10mm is still a low profile anomaly that gets you max firepower in that caliber, without the negatives. Another great attribute of the Glock 20 is the ability to shoot .40 S&W with a simple barrel changeout.

That's interesting perspective--an "evil black gun" is more politically correct than a good ol' American revolver. Frankly, it sounds a little lame to me.

 

[greyeyezz]

.357Sig doesn't do much that a 9mm or .40 won't. It's a bit faster than 9mm and .40. It penetrates hard targets a bit better and has more energy. 10mm does all of this and does it better. 10mm is balistically better than .357 Magnum as well

That seems to be the general consensus among people who have never fired one at steel plates. It hits with much more authority, period. See this thread: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=17&t=10798

I have never felt a "shock wave" hit me from a 9 or .40 standing 10-15 feet away like i have with the 357Sig.

 

[waktasz]

I think the biggest problem with 357SIG factory ammo is that no one loads it to its potential. Doubletapammo has 125grainers at 1450 FPS...thats more like it

 

[SpookyPistolero]

I agree completely with greyeyezz. All the people I know who bad mouth this cartridge have never fired it or even been around someone firing it. I've used it extensively in IDPA and on several target types. It's effect on steel is outstanding. Using +P 9mm out of a similar barrel length, there was no comparison.

I am definitely not saying that this is a magical cartridge that will kill a ten foot zombie bear, I'm just saying I'm tired of it getting a bad rap from people who have only read about the ballistics in a gun rag. The proof is in the pudding, and on the streets the .357 sig is performing quite well.

On top of its power, its the flattest shooting auto cartridge that Ive ever used. Its accuracy is inherent and ample. If I owned something that fired an overblown, ineffecient wildcat round, I'd be the first to admit it. But my experiences have certainly led me to believe the opposite.

As a side note, why would you compare grossly overloading a round (+P+ 9mm) to the bottom of the line strength level of another? Sounds fair and balanced to me...

-SpookyawaitingangryrebuttlesPistolero

 

[jc2]

That seems to be the general consensus among people who have never fired one at steel plates.

The 357 SIG may be very good on steel plates--and if that's all you shoot fine. Unfortunately, steel plates are not 150 to 250 adult male homo sapiens. There is, folks, a very, very big difference (and in more than just mass).

When it comes use as a LE/self-defence round, the 357 SIG offers nothing over the 9x19 in terms of effectiveness. Current generation premium 9x19 loads like the Ranger T (RA9T) are performing every bit as good as the 357 SIG--so, "The proof is in the pudding, and on the streets the .357 sig is performing quite well," then the 357 SIG indeed offers no advantage over the best 9x19 loads.

 

[Otherguy Overby]

Any of you'all ever tried 9X23?

Factory ammo is 1460 fps for 124 gr.

Hand loading will net some more, but .357 mag has more case volume and will work better with heavier bullets.

I'd take 9X23 any day over .357 Sig. Does Walmart sell .357 sig? I know they don't sell 9X23... The local grocery store use to...

 

[Onmilo]

I am looking for a used Glock 35 to put a KKM .357 Sig caliber barrel into.
The .357 Sig can use 95, 100, 115, 125 and 130 grain bullets and will outperform the 9mm+P with all these bullet weights and come darn close to six incj barrel .357 magnum ballistics with some.
What it won't do is function with 147 grain bullets.
I like the Glock and I appreciate the potential of the .357 Sig cartridge.
Only time will tell if it will last.
Then again everybody was convinced the .38 Super was a lost cause thirty
years ago so we shall see.

 

[waktasz]

I carry 147gr 357SIG ammo.

 

[Rockstar]

There is no reason to compare a Glock 20 to a .357 wheelgun. Glock 20 offers far superior firepower for any purpose than a .357 mag anachronism.

 

[Gixerman1000]

I have a G31 and a 229 in 357sig both have been very accurate and problem free.

It’s a great round, It is not a 357mag but it’s closer to it than it is a 9mm (that no better than a 9mm stuff is BS), The round has been racking up one shot stop numbers across the country and has more than proven it self to be devastating, enough so the US Secret Service uses a Sig 229 in 357sig.

The only thing that I don’t like about it is even the cheap FMJ ammo isn’t cheap.

Here are some links for more info on 357sig.

http://www.greent.com/40Page/ammo/357/357SIG-advoc.htm#a3

http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IIIC2q8.html

 

[ny32182]

Even the weakest 357sig is 100fps hotter than the hottest 9x19. Hot 357sig is 200fps hotter than the hottest 9mm.

However, I've been around plenty of 357sig, both shooting it and watching it being shot, and I don't feel any particular need to own one. It has a few disadvantages.

1) Ammo cost/availability. No cheap walmart ammo. You want reasonable loaded ammo cost, you have to order in bulk online.
2) Blast/concussion. It is much greater than a similar energy level .40 loading. Not a big deal on the range, but in a carry gun I don't see the need for even more blast.
3) Prone to bullet setback

 

[Graystar]

MisterG wrote:
I've been considering getting a Glock 19 but I saw a Glock ad for the .357 they sell and it mentioned that the .357 Sig is as powerful or more powerful as the .357 Magnum.

The concept behind the 357SIG cartridge was to provide the same firepower, available from the typical .357 Magnum police service revolver, from a typical police-issue auto-loading pistol. The cartridge does exactly that.

That said, the decision to go with it should be based on application. For personal self-defense, bigger bullets are better. Go with .45. .40 or 10mm is the next best option. As others have mentioned, the 357SIG is very accurate and has lots of punch because of its speed, so it’s good for certain types of competition. It’s also good for law enforcement, where a cop might have to shoot someone through a car door or some other obstacle. 9mm is always a great compromise...accurate, good power, cheap to shoot, easy to reload, and those new expanding point bullets make a pretty big hole.

Don’t get taken in by fads or hype. It’s fairly easy to simply assess your needs and pick an appropriate cartridge. Good Luck!

 

[jc2]

that no better than a 9mm stuff is BS

Both the testing conducted by the FBI (Buford Boone) and that done by Dr. Gary Roberts clearly show no meaningful differences between the 9x19 and 357 SIG. The 147-grain Ranger T (RA9T) penetrates 14.5" and expands to 0.66" inches while the 125-grain Ranger T (RA357SIGT) does 12.1" and 0.66"--in other words, the 9x19 gives 2.5" more penetration and the same expansion. The figures stay close pretty much across the battery of tests (including auto glass) with the 9x19 having a slightly better figures across the board.

Here's a current quote (10-29-04) from David DiFabio (off WT).

Todays quality ammunition products in service calibers from 9mm-.45acp are for all practical purposes identical.

It does not matter if you use a 9mm GD (for example) in 115gr 124,125, 127,147 9mm or the ever touted "more powerful" 155, 165, 180 .40 S&W jhp/( insert weight and caliber) as long as the bullet is working properly they are going to be within a few millimeters of each other in wound channel diameter and +or - and inch or two in depth.

9mm +p 125, .super 125, .357 Sig 125, .357 Magnum 125, 9x23mm 125 are basically all the same there is no significant difference between them.

David DiFabio is acknowledged and respected for his expertise in wound ballistics.

It is not a 357mag but it’s closer to it than it is a 9mm

Actually, if you stick to 124/125/127-grain bullets from the major manufacturers, the 357 SIG falls right in the middle--it has about 100 fps on the 9x19, and it falls about 100 fps short when it comes to .357 Magnum. In terms of actual bullet performance/effectiveness, there's not enough difference to make a difference. If you like heavier bullets (I do), it's no contest--the .357 Magnum can push a 158-grain JHP faster than the 357 SIG can push a 125-grain JHP.

The 357 SIG is a good round, but that's it--nothing more and nothing less. If you like it, fine, but it's no magic bullet. It offers the same level of performance and effectiveness as any of the current generation service calibres. It's just another choice.

 

[conan]

The bottle-necked design makes for super reliable feeding! The recoil factor does go up though over a 9mm.

 

[MrMurphy]

The Secret Service had the P228 in 9mm. They tested everything out there and decided (nearly) on the .38 Super. They ended up going with the .357 Sig. As Graystar said, the .357 Sig is meant to replicate the 125g .357 Magnum round, in an automatic. So instead of six .357s at 125, you get anywhere from 13 to 16 of them.

The Texas DPS and the Secret Service (among others) like the round, and apparently it performs well. In a service size gun, sure. In the compacts (Glock 33) size, it's a bit of a handful, but even compared to my beloved .45 ACP (which the DPS had used before that when they went from .357 wheelguns to automatics), I would be quite comfortable with the .357 Sig. It does a good job, has excellent penetration especially of car doors and windows (which is where the .45 doesn't do good, and the DPS wanted that capability back from when they had wheelguns).

Ammo is harder to find, but it's only been around for less than ten years I think. The .40 "got there first" so it's had a lot more acceptance, but if you're willing to put up with a little more flash and blast, it does do just fine for the role it was intended to fill (be a automatic .357 Magnum replacement).

 

[Kestrel]

The bottle-necked design makes for super reliable feeding!

I've read this a lot, but wonder how it is even more reliable than 100%? In a Sig/Glock/Beretta/Hi Power, etc., the 9mm and .40 is as reliable as you can get, so how can the bottle-neck be more reliable than that?

I think the "bottle-nose design" thoughts are probably more speculation, than comparative analysis. Doesn't mean the .357 Sig is a bad round, though. It's a good round. (I just happen to prefer .45/.40/9mm/.357mag, myself.)

If all I had was a .357 Sig, I would definitely feel well armed. I know the Texas DPS is certainly pleased with it.

Steve

 

[jc2]

The bottle-necked design makes for super reliable feeding! The recoil factor does go up though over a 9mm.

As SteveW13 pointed out, this may be more true in theory than practice. I have several 9x19 that have never had a feeding problem--it's kind of hard to beat 100%. Since the post specifically mentioned the 9x19, it should be pointed out that the 9x19 is a tapered round--similar small bullet big hole design (but without the complication of needing to headspace on both the the case mouth and the shoulder or the need of a separate brush to properly clean the chamber like the 357 SIG).

FWIW, the bottle-neck design does introduce some unique feeding problems of its own. It is quicker to nose dive than straight or tapered--particularly when your magazine springs start to get weak or you limp wrist. The 357 SIG is probably the service calibre most prone to case neck tension problems. If push comes to shove, I'd say the 9x19 is more reliable in Glocks than the 357 SIG.

it does do just fine for the role it was intended to fill (be a automatic .357 Magnum replacement).

Only if you're content to shoot nothing but 125-grain loads in your .357 Magnum. The lightest .357 Magnum load I ever shoot is a 145-grains.

It does a good job, has excellent penetration especially of car doors and windows (which is where the .45 doesn't do good, and the DPS wanted that capability back from when they had wheelguns).

Actually, the current generation .45 ACP bullets like the Ranger T and Speer Gold Dot have finally pretty well whipped that problem--they actually do a better job at intermediate barriers than the 357 SIG. If that bullet technology had be avaible fifteen years ago, the TX DPS would still be carrying P220s (and the 357 SIG would have been a footnote).

 

[PO2Hammer]

I've been thinking about the 357Sig for years.
Finaly got to shoot one (G-31) and it was quite nice. Accurate but I did not care for the felt recoil or noise, the same feeling I had about the G-22-.40s&w. I have been shooting a Glock 20-10mm for the past year and it easier to handle than the G-31/22. Recoil and noise are clearly less with the 10mm and the power is better.
The 31-357sig is easier to handle than a K frame .357 S&W Magnum (ouch) however, I just think the G20-10mm is better than both.
The 10mm is the only auto pistol caliber that compares well (NOT SUPERIOR OR INFERIOR/JUST CLOSE) with the .357 S&W Magnum.
My recomendation is go with the 9mm. Some loads are quite impressive.
When you're ready to step up get a 10mm or a .45acp or a magnum revolver.
The .40S&W and the 357Sig are not the best fit in a small frame Glock IMO.