What good is the 357 Sig?

[john l]

OK here is my basic worthless gripe:
The 357 Sig generally has factory loadings mostly in the ballpark of 1350 fps, and a few loads that push to barely over 1400 fps.
Well, Corbon 115 gr loads for 9mm go to 1350 fps, and so do the Rem +P+'s. I know, the 357 load is for 124 grainers, but I say that is nearly not worth mentioning.

Now, Everything a 357 sig can do, a 40 can do better, & with 40 bullet weights that go up to (Factory) 180 grains, then what do the 357 Sig defenders out there have to say?

I'm not insulting anyone who chooses 357 Sig, just explain "why" it is attractive to you.
Now, if your reason is as basic as, " I just thought it was cool", then that is legit to me.
thanks,
john l

 

[ny32182]

The .357sig has an EXCELLENT street record with LE so far. Take that as you will.

I tend to agree with you though as far as that goes... the thing about the 9mm+p+ is that it is going to tear up a 9mm gun faster than .357sig will a gun that was designed for it from the start, but the advantages of 9mm are higher capacity with preban mags... .357 recoils less than .40, and produces more muzzle energy than .40. very flat trajectory. Inherently more accurate and better feeding reliability than straight walled cartridges. Noticeably louder than 9 or .40, or .45. Also, the cartridge is at the beginning of its development curve, if you will. I tend to think it will eventually lend itself well to very hot subgun applications.

In the end, it seems to me like "just another choice" in the current SD market: no better or worse than any of the other premium loadings available right now.

Over at sigforum, there have been MANY dozen+ page debates on this exact topic. Head over there and dig some of them up, and you will literally have hundreds of pages of input, some of it expert input from the likes of David DeFabio, etc. That should provide all the current info you could need.

 

[mrapathy2000]

357sig can do everything 9mm can though can do it staying in standard design pressure. +p+ 9mm not being safe in all pistols and exceeding standards.

I have seen some info 357sig will get to 1500fps though my thoughts are it will over penetrate like crazy. I have yet to see any heavy grain loads for 357sig its a relatively new round. its nicer to have in bear country than 9mm even though the bullet is the same size. 357sig is in sub compact pistols and recoil seems to be bit better than 40S&W though thats not true exactly.

I myself like 40S&W its fairly versatile. from 9mm recoil like federal hydra shock 40S&W 135gr to 180 gr or the screaming corbon 135gr doing 1300fps or 155gr silvertip or remington express doing 1200fps. I wish 40S&W was revamped with thicker casing and barrel support and higher pressure. both are punishing rounds to pistols and probably wont last as long as 9mm pistols with standard loads.

I think 357sig's advantage is penetration. shooting through car windows and other objects.

357sig is to 9mm as 10mm is to 40S&W.

if you ever read clark magnuson postings on the net he has done some pretty hot loads in various guns and calibers. real insane loads. try looking for some of his postings. he mentioned he could push 9mm loads further than 357sig. sounds like 357sig cannot be pushed much to super hot loads.

dont know if you have read pete 357 website it has some good info on 357sig.


if 357sig ammo was cheaper and more loads were availible it might be worth me getting into it. will stick to 9mm and 40S&W till then. pete-357

myself I am kinda pissed of ammo manufactures for not working on 40S&W bit more. practice ammo in 135 gr doing 1100-1150fps ends up fealing like 9mm recoil wise though leaves nice .40 hole curious to how much accuracy might improve as 40S&W is not known for being accurate though 10mm is.

its possible to get similar muzzle energy out of 357sig and 40S&W it depends on the load.

 

[10-Ring]

I only have a subjective reason...I just enjoy shooting the 357sig...bigger bang, brighter flash, seemingly better accuracy & more fun to shoot than the 40 S&W.

 

[Nightcrawler]

*Yawn*

I liked it better when it was .38 Super.

 

[clubsoda22]

what good is it? More then the .45 Glock

 

[coylh]

Hi john l.

I can't think of a pistol cartridge I like more than .357 SIG. The benefits for me when compared to .40 S&W:

* I like the bottleneck. All else being equal, a small bullet going into a big chamber is a better feeding design.

* The other guns I shoot are .380, .38 Special, 9x19, and .357 Magnum, so I'm perfectly happy in using 115 and 125 grain bullets. I tend to choose lighter weight loadings anyway, so I would not carry a 180 grain .40 S&W regarless of its availability.


There are other general benefits too:

* I'm happy with the power vs. recoil balance. It produces the right amount of energy for me at about 500 foot-pounds. And, I don't need to shoot over-pressure cartridges in my gun to obtain this power.

* It's a nicely sized cartridge. I can put 12 rounds into a grip that's not too fat, not too long, and get a comfortable hold on it.

The only down side to .357 SIG that I have seen is that it's slightly more expensive than similar cartridges. For example, one web site lists a case of .40 S&W at $170. The same kind of ammo case for .357 SIG is $190. This is inconsequential for me, given the number of rounds I shoot and the other advantages of the cartridge.

I'm not on a quest to find the perfect cartridge, just a satifsactory one. And right now I can't think of one I like more. Now, if .400 Corbon were to go mainstream, I might have to reconsider.

 

[PCRCCW]

Just a couple of notes........as far as guns lasting longer in 357 Sig or hotter 9mm's ..NOPE. Since the caliber is newer, data is just starting to come back. Glock, Sig etc....are all publishing data saying the Sig kills guns faster than the 40 or 9mm does.

Any time you bottleneck a round you increase the pressure. This may account for the unforseen wear and tear on the guns.

IMO, Ill stick with 9mm or 40...I see no difference in a 135 gr round screaming at over 1300 FPS while having more mass/frontal area over both the 9mm diameter bullets.........ok nice theory....

I carry a 9mm......Corbon 115's................Shoot well.

 

[Graystar]

The idea behind the 357SIG's existence is to provide the same ballistics that you get from a standard .357 Mag revolver in an auto package.

The reason for doing this is to provide police with a gun that has street-proven ballistics, but with greater capacity than a .357 Mag revolver.

Cops have different requirements from their guns that the typical Joe. Cops may need to shoot someone that is far away. They may need to shoot through glass. They may even need to shoot through a car door. The 357SIG can do all that because it is a very accurate round that is small and has lots of power to penetrate.

While a .40 has lots of power, it doesn't have the same penetration. It can't...it's plain ol' bigger! Personally, I found 357SIG more accurate than .40.

So for police work, I think they got a winner. However, for CCW I think a .40 is better, and .45 best.

That being said, I did buy my girlfriend a 357SIG for CCW, because it would also be the gun she uses when camping. If she needed to shoot a bear, you want a round with the greatest penetration. That has the best chance of getting the bear's attention and hopefully make him think you're not worth the effort.

 

[XLMiguel]

For the guys who want .400 Corbon or a higher pressure .40 S&W, it's been done, I believe it's called the 10 mm

Personally, in my limited experience, I like the .357 SIG vs. the .40 - very good performance balance, very reliable feeding, and seems to be more accurate than the .40.

 

[Beav]

I agree with 10-ring, I just enjoy shooting it more. My only gripe is its cost.

 

[Beav]

Just a couple of notes........as far as guns lasting longer in 357 Sig or hotter 9mm's ..NOPE. Since the caliber is newer, data is just starting to come back. Glock, Sig etc....are all publishing data saying the Sig kills guns faster than the 40 or 9mm does.

What 9mm and 40S&W ammo, specifically, are they comparing the 357sig to?
I don't think its fair to compare +P+ rounds when it comes to performance and then use lower pressure rounds when it comes to wear and tear.

 

[Yo]

From a reloader's standpoint the answer would be "no good at all."

But, one could also ask the question, what good is .40sw, again from the perspective of one who reloads and shoots for sport, not to kill.

The 9mm is cheap, reliable, and won't break even older C&R guns. You can buy 1000 reloads at a gunshow for $90, and once-fired brass is so cheap I don't even bother picking up empties at the range anymore.

.45acp bests .40sw for accuracy. My $670 SW1911 groups well under 1.5" at 25 yards. The only .40 I've seen come close to that was a $1100 Sig 229 Sport, and then only with a few loads. The .45 case is easy to load, functions well at low pressures, and you'll lose the brass before it wears out.

Look at most fired .40 brass, it's badly bulged where it's not supported, and you have very little latitude for error if you run your load a little hot.

I used to have 3 40sw guns. Now I have one. I use the 9mm for high volume gun games. Use the .45 acp where accuracy counts, such as falling plates.

I suppose the .40sw may have some edge in killing power over a hot 9mm, but as someone else said, there's a better cartridge for that--the 10mm. Personally for defense, I use a revolver or a 12gauge.

If I had to shoot a .40sw as an issued gun, pretty much the only gun I'd use is a Sig 229. I had an HK40c. Too much muzzle flip. Oh and the slide cracked with factory ammo.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

The 357 sig is good because it came in the 229 sport. At the time I wanted the sport because it felt really good in the hand. The 229 sport was only available in 357 sig, ergo got a sig.

What the 40 short and weak (I see no purpose in the round by the way, just get a 10mm if you want .400 power) cannot do is drive an 88 grn bullet at 1640 fps. I can do that with my 357 sig and it does not even break a sweat. Nearly zero recoil and exceptionally accurate. The muzzle blast is amazing and fun.

The real question is what good is the 40 short and weak given the 357 sig and the 10mm?

 

[ny32182]

The real question is what good is the 40 short and weak given the 357 sig and the 10mm?

Well... the .357sig is:

-more expensive than 9mm or .40
-harder to find than 9mm or .40
-recoils more than 9mm.
-has less capacity than 9mm
-is much louder than either
-produces more flash than either.

the .40 is:

-more common and less expensive than .357
-makes bigger holes while using the same capacity mags as .357
-is more powerful than 9mm
-has less noise/concussion/blast/flash than .357
-fits into normal size guns, when the 10mm doesn't. I'm not going to be carrying around a mega-size G20 or S&W auto all day.

The 9mm is:

-The cheapest and easiest to find
-Plenty viable as a self defense round.
-15+ round mags are tough to beat.

.357 seems just fine for a range gun (flat trajectory, very accurate, etc), but the SD drawbacks are very real. Even if money is no object for practice ammo, MORE blast and flash is not something I'm going to be looking for if I ever have to fire the gun with no hearing protection, possibly in the middle of the night.

 

[ny32182]

What the 40 short and weak (I see no purpose in the round by the way, just get a 10mm if you want .400 power) cannot do is drive an 88 grn bullet at 1640 fps.

Again, not trying to be picky here, but even if you WANTED to drive an 88 grn load at 1600+ fps (why?) there are in fact factory ~90gr .40 loads (fragile ammo I suppose) driven to those speeds.

 

[45+]

Texas DPS carries the 357 Sig and they have tried all sorts over the years. I think the logic is something like the 357 Magnum (which I hear they liked) in a semi-auto. Fast reloads and great ballistics for highway le use. Some of us like other calibers better, but I would not turn down a 357 Sig "loaner" during a gun fight if mine stopped working.

 

[Teufelhunden]

I don't own one, so I can't claim to be a true fan, but doesn't 10mm really trump just about any argument made between which caliber is best for defense? It's a wide bullet, it can be loaded very hot or very tame, and it's inherently safer than the .40 (two of which I own). I suppose the only realy drawbacks are price, which would come down if 10mm were popular, and the grip size...


Maybe it's time to get a 10mm...

-Teuf

 

[Peter M. Eick]

As a reloader I am only interested in ammo I can reload. Yes there are frangable light 40 short and weak rounds, but they are expensive. 88 grn rem JHP bullets are cheap. Why do I like them, accurate, light recoil and lots of fun at the range to just blast with. Why do I like the 1640 fps screamers as I call them? When I double tap them it just echos on the range and with the 229 sport, I bring dust down from the rafters with the comp. It actually causes the gun to recoil down.

Again, reading over your 40/9mm comments, since I reload it is basically a wash to me. I can make 357sig ammo for about what it costs to make 9mm ammo. The only difference is the extra powder. Yes the 40 fits in a smaller frame gun, but that is what I have the 357sig for. If I want power I go for the 10mm and 800x for power.

So again, the question is (to those of us who reload) what good is the 40 when you have a 357 sig and 10mm? (sorry for the missed reloading comment)

 

[ny32182]

If I reloaded, I'd be taking a harder look at .357sig and 10mm for range use, as the cost factor wouldn't come into play so much, and the 10mm especially is such a versatile cartridge. But for a carry gun, all the points I stated are just as valid. Especially for those who don't reload, the 9 and .40 just seem to make the most sense.

I'd be perfectly happy to own guns in any of the calibers/reload, and probably will someday, but for now, I want the most practical SD guns possible. my .02.

 

[Parker Dean]

Originally posted by Teufelhunden
Maybe it's time to get a 10mm...

You mean you DON'T have one yet?!



Heathen

 

[NevadaPistolero]

The 357sig is a better round than the .40 or 9mm...there is no comparison. 357sig has a higher kill ratio......9mm the smallest. You cant even compare a 9mm to the 357sig round, there in different ball parks all together. 357sig is not more expensive, is not hard to find or any of that. I buy 115 gr CorBon for $11.99 per box ....thats the same a hydra shocks and the others. The 357sig will do alot more than a .40 cal anyday. All the info you need to back it up can be found on the net. Before I bought mine I did a lot of reading on the subject......357sig outperforms them all. Like said above it was partly designed to be the 357 mag of auto pistols and it has proven its worth. More and more police and government agencies are going to the 357sig...theres a reason for this...it out performs the .40 and beats the hell out of the weak 9mm. If you only read one balistics chart instead of many your not getting the right info ........prejudiced reviews and out right liars will say anything required of them when there bought off by certain ammo companies or gun makers. Shoot a metal target with a .40 cal, then shoot it with a 357sig.....NO COMPARISON. The 357sig will destroy the target...the .40 if your lucky might dent it. Now you can flame me all you want but facts are facts.

 

[jc2]

The 357sig is a better round than the .40 or 9mm...there is no comparison.

Not exactly true--matter of fact, a long, long way from truth. I could post a list of penetration and expansion figures for the 9x19 and 357 SIG, and you couldn't pick out which was which--because they are, for all practical purposes, identical. In LE shootings, they are running neck and neck as well (even in--or particularly in--the standard velocity RA9T). They penetrate and expand the same, and they perform for LE the same. Performance is a wash.

The 357 SIG will give you more muzzle blast and muzzle flip (big, big negatives). The 9x19 will give you faster splits (big plus). The 357 SIG is harder on the shooter and the weapon than the 9x19 (if you think a Glock 31 will outlast a Glock 17, you're deluding yourself). The 9x19 will has a higher capacity (10% or better in the sub or personal size weapons). It is far easier to find find 9x19 ammunition (both practice and premium), and it is less expensive when you do find it.

So, in performance, it's a wash--they are two peas in pod. In other areas (capacity, "shootability," durability, ammo availability/cost), it is clearly advantage 9x19).

 

[NevadaPistolero]

Then what your saying is that all the LE tests are bogus......why would they go to the 357sig if they were equal????? Like I said its very easy to put to rest...shoot a metal target with the 40cal and the 9mm...then shoot it with the 357sig.....which does more damage??? There finding out they have more one shot kills with the 357sig(real people not gelatin). And from the balistic test in gelatin Ive read the 357sig out performs them both. There are plenty of leos who have shot the BG multple times with a 9mm and the guy is still a threat...that doesnt happen with the 357sig round. Explain that one to me. And again..why are they all choosing the 357sig over 9mm a.40cal????? Stupidity???? They did their own testing and got super results with the 357sig round. Theres a reason.....test prove its a better round. Also a more reliable loading round because of the tappered casing. 9mm is fast losing ground in the US.....it is a weak round, I like to call it a euro trash bullet. Most people today shoot 9mm for target shooting because its so cheap, some for self defense because they can get a lighter weapon thats easier to conceal, I wear a XD 357sig daily for my CCW gun and I have no problem concealing it. Theres no way you can honestly compare a 9mm to a 357sig...its impossible and your fooling yourself. I hope you would get your test information from more then one website. There are a lot of biased writers and testers out there especially for the 9mm. Personnaly I dont care what caliber pistol people use, I'll take the 357sig any day over any of the others.

 

[mgobel]

I chose 357 SIG

Because I shot it better than 40 in my chosen carry platform (SIG 239) and I could practice with ammunition which featured close to the same performance as my carry loads.

Shot placement is critical...but a little extra power can't hurt( I hope).

While not an expert in metal fatigue, I would think that NATO 124 gr +p+ 9mm would wear out a 9mm 239 faster than 357 would wear out a 357 239.

YMMV