torn between 357 sig and 9MM

[ny32182]

The police are civilians. They are not members of the military, and their guns are used for self defense just like the rest of us.

"Flat shooting" is only going to be an advantage if you are shooting it out of a subgun at ranges of 100+ yards. A pistol, offhand, at any reasonable self defense range... ballistic performance at long range will not be a realistic factor in whether you hit the target.

Reloading will help with 357sig, but will not be nearly as easy as a common straight walled case: Since the brass is rare you will probably loose it faster and need to buy it at least occassionally, and you must lube as far as I know... are there any 357sig dies out there that can be used without lube that anyone knows about?

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by ny32182: The police are civilians.

One more time: not according to the dictionary, not according to convention used here and at TFL, and not according to most common usage in the firearms and law enforcement dictionary. Lets drop it--we do not debate that subject on THR.

They are not members of the military,...[/QUOTE}Excluding AP, MP, and SP, that is true.

...their guns are used for self defense just like the rest of us

.Yes, but they are used for more than that. They are used to enforce the law. That may include neutralizing a sniper, shooting someone who is holding a hostage, engaging in a running gun battle with felons, and under rare circumstances, shooting a fleeing felon.

In some jurisdictions, but not all, civilians may do some of these things under somecircumstances, though in some that may require the direction of a sworn officer. The biggest difference lies in what constitutes necessity; the civilian must reaonably believe that it is immediately necessary to employ deadly force to defend himself or a third person or to prevent a forcible felony before using his firearm, again with variance acording to jurisdiction; avoidance is his first course. The sworn officer cannot avoid danger--he has the duty to enforce the law.

That is what gives rise to the requirement that many police organizations have for shooting though automobile bodies and plate glass windows.

Forthat reason, greater penetration might be desired by officers for some applications. The concern about danger to bystanders due to energy remaining after "pass through" or ricochet is common to everyone, however.

Back in the day, one found the .38-44 .38 Special loadings, the .38 Super Automatic, and later the .357 Magnum, in the hands of highway patrol and special units, and .38 Special standard loads in most others. From what I've read, the .357 SIG is very popular among highway patrol organizations and some Federal agencies.

"Flat shooting" is only going to be an advantage if you are shooting it out of a subgun at ranges of 100+ yards. A pistol, offhand, at any reasonable self defense range... ballistic performance at long range will not be a realistic factor in whether you hit the target.

I agree. However, Elmer Keith used to extoll the virtues of the flat shooting 7.65MM Luger for small game hunting, for what that's worth, and if one were good enough I think the .357 SIG might have an advantage for shooting small animals.

 

[Ala Tom]

I do not see why you think these are your two choices - a lowpower caliber that is cheap and easy to obtain vs a high power caliber that is expensive, rare and may soon become obsolete.

Consider the .40S&W or the .45 ACP. They offer broad availability of ammo yet still cheaper and nearly the same energy as the 357 Sig.

I have a MP40 and am considering getting a barrel for $80 that will let me shoot 357Sig if I want to. I figure it might be interesting and $80 is not too much to risk on possible obsolescence.

I have considered getting a 9mm. I see range ammo for it at half the cost of 40SW. But I don't see a practical job for the 9mm. If I want to shoot cheaply with a load that has little practical value, I shoot my 22. That is half the cost of 9mm and probably as much fun. (Have not shot a 9mm in decades.)

 

[Zundfolge]

"Flat shooting" is only going to be an advantage if you are shooting it out of a subgun at ranges of 100+ yards. A pistol, offhand, at any reasonable self defense range... ballistic performance at long range will not be a realistic factor in whether you hit the target.

I would also argue that "flat shooting" is advantageous for putting holes in paper too (which is what the vast majority of ammunition discharged in the US is used for).

 

[JustinJ]

I don't see the .357 sig going away anytime soon as it has been slowly but steadily growing in popularity. TX DPS likes them, supposedly for their ability to penetrate car windows and windshields. I have a HK P2000SK in .357 sig as my primary carry gun. I also have a .40 barrel for it which is one of my favorite things about the round. You can convert any .357 sig auto to .40 just by swapping the barrel. Same magazines and recoil spring. Anecdotal and ballistics testing indicate that it is one hell of a manstopper, much more so than a 9 mm.

 

[xr1200]

The 357 sig isn't a bad cartridge , as long as you could buy it as cheaply as 40sw or 9mm.

Basically the argument centers around the old 9mm vs 45 acp debate, it all depends on what type of gun you want to carry and what circumstances you will carry it under.

In most self defense senarios 9mm or 40sw will do every thing you ask of them and the 357 sig is just overkill.

 

[JustinJ]

"In most self defense senarios 9mm or 40sw will do every thing you ask of them and the 357 sig is just overkill."

I see no reason not to use the most effective round possible that is still practical and I would say that is not 9mm for most people. There is a reason so many departments are moving away from it.

 

[xr1200]

The main reasons not to use the sig 357 would be possible over penentration, controllability etc.

357 sig is in the same boat as 10mm was in the early 90's , great round but it was really hard for most shooters to control and it had more power than really needed to stop an attacker, and it was expensive to shoot and even reload.

This was the main reason the FBI and SW came out with the 40sw, which is really a down loaded 10mm with a shorter case.

 

[Black Butte]

Why not get a .40 S&W with a .357 Sig conversion barrel? You wouldn't have a 9 mm, but you would have two calibers in one gun.

 

[JustinJ]

Personally I don't find the .357 to be significantly harder to control than a .40 but yes, more so than a 9. I think the 9mm will stop most attackers but carrying a gun itself is a practice itself in preparing for unlikely scenarios. Plus with good expanding ammo i dont believe over penetration is any more of an issue than with other handgun rounds.

 

[chadintex]

I chose the .357sig for the penetration on 4 legged varmints that pop up around our place. Get a 9mm barrel for the best of both worlds.

 

[AK103K]

Ive had a number of pistols in 357SIG over the past few years, and was actually quite enamored with the caliber there for awhile there.

Then I came to the realization that it was really nothing more than a 9mm +P+, and with the rising costs, both for loaded ammo and reloading, I just didnt see the point anymore, and went back to 9mm.


All the arguments over power, or the "perception" of power between the different rounds is really pretty pointless. Everyone seems to have their pet "stats" they like to throw around to prove their point, and you see more arguments over a few fps and it tends to just get silly. Pick the one you like and shoot the best, and be happy, youll be fine. If youre feeling inadequate or less manly with any of them, grow up and get over it.


Some things on ammo and reloading for 357SIG. At one time, factory ammo was not all that bad, and I usually paid exactly the same price for it and .40S&W when bought in bulk. Since the last ammo mess, the 357SIG for some reason has taken off, and is now quite a bit more than the .40's.

Back when they were fairly cheap, I didnt find it worth my while to reload for it, as the factory stuff was only costing me about a buck a box more than what I could reload it for. Once the prices went up, that changed. Still, 357SIG is not anywhere near as cheap to load for as 9mm is. Main reason is the caliber specific bullets, which tend to be pricey, when you can find them. You can "sometimes" use 9mm bullets, but that can be hit or miss, mostly due to bullet shapes. Powder charges are a good bit different too. 13.0 grains of AA #9 for the 357SIG versus 4.5-5.0 grains of 231 for 9mm, depending on load. Brass is actually fairly cheap and readily available for both.


The easiest, and probably cheapest solution here, is to pick a gun in 357SIG, that will take an after market 9mm barrel. Most that have them available, are truly drop in swaps, and you just need mags of the correct caliber. Dont be surprised if the gun ends up being a 9mm though.

I had a Glock 31 with a Lone Wolf 9mm barrel, and it worked great. Some will tell you you need to change out other parts, but I never had any trouble, and I actually shot more 9mm's out of the gun than I did 357SIG.

One odd thing here, at least with the Glock, mine was heavily battering the underside of the slide when shot with 357SIG. I was told it would stop, but it never gave any signs of doing so. I also have a number of Glock 17's, which have had a lot more rounds through them than my 31 did, and most of those rounds were +P, +P+, and hot reloads, and not a hint of peening. Only just recently, Ive started to notice the finish is starting to wear at the same points, but the metal is fine. So much for +P+ beating the gun to death.

 

[macadore]

Before I bought the. 357 SIG I would consider if it will still be around in 20 years.

It's already been around 17 years. It will be around at least as long as the 38 Super.

In most scenarios the 357 Sig does not gain that much over the 9mm. When your life is on the line, do you want that very slight edge?

 

[RugerNut9]

First off I must point out that the Moderators on this forum are awesome haha I really enjoy reading their corrections
I would say that you cannot go wrong with either one however 9mm is a great controllable round and its been around a long time. The best way to decide would be shoot both and then decide what YOU are more accurate and consistent with.

 

[Ben86]

I personally don't see .357 sig offering much more over some good, hot 9mm. It never interested me one bit.

 

[yhtomit]

Having shot .357sig only a few times, I am *interested* in shooting it more, but not enough to buy a gun in that caliber, pay the premium for the ammo, etc. It's also not a caliber that I (a beginner -- only .45acp so far) want to reload, either. Straight walled cases are a lot simpler for that

The feel of the .357sig I shot was interesting -- a sharp snap, but not hard to control.

timothy

 

[tipoc]

A civilian who is not sworn to enforce the law has not need to shoot through plate glass and little if any need to shoot through car bodies.

TX DPS likes them, supposedly for their ability to penetrate car windows and windshields.

Many rounds will easily penetrate auto and truck windshields and bodies (of course this depends on where they hit and at what distance) this includes the 9mm, the 40 S&W, the 38 Super, the 45 acp, some loads of the 38 Spl., the 357 Magnum and a good many more. It did take a little bit of work back when auto and truck bodies were made of thicker gage steel but with the alloy or polymer bodies of today it is not all that hard. Bullet construction has some effect.

The 357 Sig is a fine round. I'll never argue against another decent round being made.

The op has a false choice. No reason not to have both. But if the choice is between those two and you can only have one. Than the 9mm will do all you need.

tipoc

 

[Guns and more]

9mm.
You know why.

 

[aryfrosty]

I can see your point but I believe that Police Officers are by the nature of being sworn to a binding oath not a civilian. A Citizen, yes.
I went into .357Sig guns through the back door...I had a G23 and a G27. I bought a .357S barrel for the G27 and liked it so much I bought a NIB G32. I don't reload so I went to Cabala's and bought a sizable amount of factory reloaded ammo for the .357S. I have both .357S and .40S&W barrels for all my Glocks and if the .357S doesn't hang around, which I hope doesn't happen I will be satisfied. I like everything I find in the .357S...it is a tractable but ballistically satisfying round.

 

[AK103K]

It's also not a caliber that I (a beginner -- only .45acp so far) want to reload, either. Straight walled cases are a lot simpler for that

Its actually just as easy as anything else to load for. If you use a .40S&W carbide sizer, you dont need to lube the cases, and its just one extra step. Use a powder like AA #9, and the bullet setback issue you always hear brought up, becomes a non issue.

 

[jbrown50]

It's an HK P2000, LEM trigger with 200 rds. through it. I have the box, grips etc. that comes with it new, standard sights. I found some entries on gunsamerica.com

I'll second what JustinJ wrote.
Why not just drop a .40 S&W barrel into the gun and keep it?
That's one of the nice qualities of most 357 Sig guns. They're easily convertible to .40.

Of course, if you are simply using "357 Sig" as a reason to get rid of the gun then ...........

 

[SIGLBER]

As you said you can get some hot 9mm ammo to give performance in the same range as the .357 SIG. Granted it's +P or +P+ but it's not a problem in a good gun. The .357 SIG is expensive. Ballistics are good but as mentioned not mcuh if any better than the best 9mm. And 9mm is still one of th cheapest centerfire rounds going for practice. If you want the .357 SIG keep it. If I'm going to pay that much for ammo it will be for my .45's. Just doesn't do anything fo me. But if you like it choice is a good thing.

 

[thefamcnaj]

When i first got into guns, I wanted to buy all the compact and subcompact glocks. I got the 9's 40's and 45's and thought it was time to move on to the 357sig. I went to the gun store all hyped up about getting the g33. Once I looked at the gun and held it I ask about the price and availability of ammo. With me not being a reloader yet, the price of the ammo was kind of shocking to me. I wanted to eventually carry the gun on me but I personally like to put a few hundred rounds through a pistol before I'll carry it. So with the cost of the ammo and knowing that I would want to put alot of rounds through, I was scared off from the 357 sig caliber pistols.

 

[orionengnr]

gym, he reloads, the cost difference between 9mm and .357 SIG when reloading is going to be negligible, maybe a penny a round for more propellent.

Well, I can pick up 9mm brass by the hundreds at my local range. I can pick up .357 SIG brass by the tens on a good day.

I have shot the .357 SIG through a Glock, and was not impressed. A .40-sized case with a 9mm-sized projectile, fired "almost" as fast as a real .357 Mag, and making enough noise that no sane person would keep one as an HD pistol. IMHO, the .357 SIG is a compromise in every sense of the word.

 

[RugerMcMarlin]

yeah they beat me to it, ditto, on the switch barrel idea, like glock 23 .40S&W, I think it takes a mag and a barrel in 357Sig, that versatile enough to justify its existance. 9MM lots cheaper and easier to get if you dont want to reload, but 357Sig is awesomely flat shooting. I read somewhere that Texas Public Safety Officers HIGHLY recommend the sig for severe Pit Bull adjustment.