View Full Version : What is the point of the .357 Sig?
I understand that the 357 Sig 'approaches' the ballistics of the venerable .357 Magnum, yet isn't it just a 9 mm +P+? Anyone carry this caliber and shoot it regularly? I know several fed/state agancies issue 357 Sig cal. handguns, what is it they find charming in the 357 Sig?
SingleStacker45
11-24-08, 07:23
I think there are some agencies that realize the penetration advantages of a faster moving 9mm bullet. I recently found a video showing a 357 sig round penetrating a soft armor. Makes you think. If you have time to watch it's interesting to see how the armor reacts to various rounds. The .357 is later in the video.
Mule
http://www.safarilandarmorwear.com/index.cfm?event=product.detail§ion=6
Code3Patriot
11-24-08, 10:39
My Sheriff's Office (1,100 sworn) issues the P226R/P229R in .357SIG. Those are our only two options for on duty unless we're in a special assignment, and even then the gun (usually a P239) has to be chambered in .357SIG.
My SO is in a urban, high crime area and unfortunately officer involved shootings are common. I've been on for 6 years and in that time we've had five shootings if my cop math is correct. All but one of those shootings were fatal for the bad guy(s), and that one was a hip shot off a motorcycle from 20 yards or so. Another one of the shootings was fatal for two people.
Our department likes the round becuase, it has proven itself in the field, it tends to be very accurate (depending on the shooter), it expands fantastically in the human chest cavity, and it punched right through a windshield when it needed to to save a deputy's life.
We use the Speer Gold Dot 125gr.
I consider the round to be the 9MM Magnum. maybe faster than some of the +P+ rounds, slower than the .357Magnum, depending on the individual gun and barrel length they are fired in, but I like it because the case and guns it is fired in are DESIGNED for the higher pressures of the round.
while a lot of the 9MM guns are approved for +P rounds, there is no SAAMI spec for +P+. take that for what it's worth...
I understand that the 357 Sig 'approaches' the ballistics of the venerable .357 Magnum, yet isn't it just a 9 mm +P+? Anyone carry this caliber and shoot it regularly? I know several fed/state agancies issue 357 Sig cal. handguns, what is it they find charming in the 357 Sig?
Standard 357 Sig is around 100 fps faster than any 9mm+P+ I've ever seen listed in product catalogs, in the 124-127 weights. If you think the +P and +P+ 9mm rounds serve a purpose then the 357 is an extension of those. If you are from the subsonic 147 9mm camp then the 357 is simply frivolous.
7.62Nato, as hatt says, .357 Sig is actually capable of even "hotter" loadings than any 9mm+P or +P+. This is alleged to make it capable of greater penetration, and in my understanding, the greater penetration is usually the main motive for using .357 Sig.
If you check a lot of the commercial loadings available, you find that the hottest-loaded self-defense ammunition in .357 Sig does indeed, on paper, appear to outperform even the best 9mm +P or +P+ loads. For example, go to a company like DoubleTap Ammo (www.doubletapammo.com), and compare their 115gr HP loadings in 9mm +P, and the 115gr HP in .357 Sig. The .357 Sig has significantly higher velocity and energy at the muzzle and at 50 yards.
But that is not the whole story, obviously there's more to ballistics than just velocity and energy. DocGkr and his crew have done some research on the .357 Sig, and this is posted at TacticalForums in the "Terminal Effects" section. Here's a link to a thread that provides a whole bunch of links to detailed discussions of the .357 Sig, the testing that has been done with it, and some assessments of its effectiveness:
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=001658
The 357SIG/Auto does what most everything else does, at a higher price point, with greater maintenance issues, and diminished shooter performance.
Like most other calibers, there's little compelling argument for it.
sigmundsauer
11-24-08, 19:12
.357 SIG simply attempts to mimic .357 Mag ballistics from a short barreled revolver in a more manageable, and higher fire power pistol. Basically, if you think a 125 grain bullet using a decent JHP driven fast is good, then driving it faster is better. All ballistics is based on this premise, assuming the bullet is properly engineered for the targeted velocity. There is no doubt that .357 SIG is better than virtually every 9mm loading available and is far better suited for continuous use in such chambered pistols.
Tim
Business_Casual
11-24-08, 19:19
There is no doubt that .357 SIG is better than virtually every 9mm loading available and is far better suited for continuous use in such chambered pistols.
Tim
:confused:
I do not own a .357sig firearm, but I would like to. The only problem for me is the much higher cost of the ammo, it is double 9mm and .40 around here. I know on sigforum almost everyone who tries .357 likes it a lot, and then the .40 barrel usually sits around after trying it. Once tried, people seem to like it a lot, the key is actually trying it it seems.
I would like to try a HKP2000sk in .357, and get a .40 barrel too as it is my usual carry caliber. I think that would be nice, but with the ammo cost I may never try it out.
In my HKP2000 .357 Sig, I use Double Tap's 125gr Speer Gold Dot round which leaves the muzzle at a true 1400+ fps, clearly .357 Magnum revolver velocity.
Texas DPS uses this caliber in the Sig platform and praises its performance--especially its ability to penetrate windshield glass.
if you build it they will come...
Alaskapopo
11-24-08, 23:45
The 357SIG/Auto does what most everything else does, at a higher price point, with greater maintenance issues, and diminished shooter performance.
Like most other calibers, there's little compelling argument for it.
+1. I found that out the hard way. I owned 8 different 357 sig pistols.I sold them all. I like 45's and 9mm's now.
Pat
Alaskapopo
11-24-08, 23:45
In my HKP2000 .357 Sig, I use Double Tap's 125gr Speer Gold Dot round which leaves the muzzle at a true 1400+ fps, clearly .357 Magnum revolver velocity.
Texas DPS uses this caliber in the Sig platform and praises its performance--especially its ability to penetrate windshield glass.
The ability to penetrate windshields is more a function of load selection than caliber selection.
Pat
Alaskapopo
11-24-08, 23:48
I consider the round to be the 9MM Magnum. maybe faster than some of the +P+ rounds, slower than the .357Magnum, depending on the individual gun and barrel length they are fired in, but I like it because the case and guns it is fired in are DESIGNED for the higher pressures of the round.
while a lot of the 9MM guns are approved for +P rounds, there is no SAAMI spec for +P+. take that for what it's worth...
Actually most 357 sigs are simply 9mm's with an enlarged breach face and a different barrel and magazine. A 9mm that is fed a steady diet of +p+ ammo will last longer than a 357 sig fed a steady diet of full power 357 sig ammo.
Pat
sigmundsauer
11-25-08, 08:00
Actually most 357 sigs are simply 9mm's with an enlarged breach face and a different barrel and magazine. A 9mm that is fed a steady diet of +p+ ammo will last longer than a 357 sig fed a steady diet of full power 357 sig ammo.
Pat
And how do you account for the substantially beefed up slide mass on .357 SIG pistols that is usually built for heavy .40 bullets?....and the stiffer recoil spring rates? .357 SIG is meant to be shot in the pistols in which it is chambered. 9mm +P+ almost always results in measurably higher slide velocity that what the pistol was designed for. Your statement makes little sense.
Any .357 SIG loading can achieve 9mm +P+ velocities with equivalent bullet weights at a LOWER pressure....add that to increased slide mass and stiffer recoil springs and it will almost certainly outlast a 9mm, period. Glocks may be an exception as there is little difference in slide mass and spring rates between the two....and thus don't last as long in .40/.357 SIG.
Tim
357 Sig is the product of Law Enforcement Officer involved shooting statistics… Looking at the raw data from a huge number of recorded OISs throughout the entire country, spanning several decades, showed one thing… That is; when a LEO is shooting at a human being, a .357 caliber projectile, weighing 125+/- grains, traveling at 1250+/- feet per second, has by far the greatest number of recorded single shot kills…
With that in mind, the USSS lead the charge to the 357 Sig for executive protection. They were looking for a handgun that will stack the odds in their favor…
B
The 357SIG/Auto does what most everything else does, at a higher price point, with greater maintenance issues, and diminished shooter performance.
Like most other calibers, there's little compelling argument for it.
well, actually the 357SIG is cheaper per 50rd. than .45ACP and about the same as .40S&W in JHP quality commercial ammo. in FMJ, the .357 is about a dollar more but still cheaper than .45.
in firearms designed for the round, such as the SIG P229, there are no greater maintenance issues - certainly none over the .40S&W in the same firearm.
while it does have somewhat more muzzle blast over other rounds, particularly the 9MM, and in some cases the .40, actual recoil is less than then the most common loadings of the .40. and while everyone acknowledges this is a trade-off to using the .40, no one uses it as a condemnation of the round. it has its uses and its compromises, just like any round.
I will also say that any round of same caliber and weight, fired at the same velocity will exhibit similar perceived recoil, so the idea that 9MM +P+ is somehow more manageable than 357SIG doesn't hold water - apples to apples and all that.
however, I understand that perceived recoil is what we are talking about and some shooters will feel differently about either round based on their level of experience and comfort. diminished shooter performance in this case would only be relative to the 9MM standard loadings.
so all in all, I view the comments of those who condemn the round just like those of its most stringent fans - the truth is somewhere in the middle. long story short, it's a viable round for those who want to use it for its strengths and are willing to accept its shortcomings.
I am still under the opinion that shot placement is the key along with multiple shots. Any 9mm, .357 sig, .40 S&W or .45ACP will do the job with good bullet design and proper placement. Statistics make for discussion - marketing makes for choices for you - caliber makes arguements - feeling confident in your ability and your sidearm makes success and survival.
"This is the .357 Sig, the most powerful handgun in the world! Since it would probably blow your head clear off, ........The question you gotta ask yourself....... Is do I feel lucky?.........Well, do ya?.....Punk!":D
.357 SIG simply attempts to mimic .357 Mag ballistics from a short barreled revolver in a more manageable, and higher fire power pistol. Basically, if you think a 125 grain bullet using a decent JHP driven fast is good, then driving it faster is better. All ballistics is based on this premise, assuming the bullet is properly engineered for the targeted velocity. There is no doubt that .357 SIG is better than virtually every 9mm loading available and is far better suited for continuous use in such chambered pistols.
Tim
I'm guessing you're going to get some disagreement on this... :D
Doc GKR has repeatedly shown that in testing, the 357SIG has no advantages over the best loadings of 9MM in ballistic gelatin. this is a repeatable, quantifiable response and is not arguable.
however, anecdotal evidence indeed shows a very significant success ratio of this round, and I feel that terminal ballistics are just one piece of the formula that equals making a bad guy stop doing what it was that made you want to shoot them in the first place.
for all I know, the "increased muzzle blast and flash" may have as much to do with it as anything! that is, psychological state and perception on the part of the person being shot are quite as important as bullet performance in circumstances where there is no immediate incapacitation shot (CNS).
Actually most 357 sigs are simply 9mm's with an enlarged breach face and a different barrel and magazine. A 9mm that is fed a steady diet of +p+ ammo will last longer than a 357 sig fed a steady diet of full power 357 sig ammo.
Pat
sorry. that's not correct.
well... actually it might be in the case of Glocks. of course, the Glock is a better pistol in 9MM, in which it was designed, than the .40S&W, which was rushed into production by doing what you say.
in pistols designed for the higher pressures of the .40 and 357SIG, that would not be true.
Business_Casual
11-25-08, 11:08
actually it might be in the case of Glocks. of course, the Glock is a better pistol in 9MM, in which it was designed, than the .40S&W, which was rushed into production
Huh? Isn't that pure conjecture? Did you work at Glock Austria when they were creating the 22 and 23? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to know how so many people "know" that Glock didn't do the 40 pistols right.
So help me out here.
M_P
well, actually the 357SIG is cheaper per 50rd. than .45ACP and about the same as .40S&W in JHP quality commercial ammo. in FMJ, the .357 is about a dollar more but still cheaper than .45.
It depends on where and what you're buying. My sourcing, and bids, put 357SIG 1/4-1/3 higher than other service calibers. Add now specialty loads (green frangibles) and it's worse. Where the difference is minimal, it still adds up to substantial differences in total quantities consumed. Add now delivery times and inventory sustainment, and you get a better picture.
in firearms designed for the round, such as the SIG P229, there are no greater maintenance issues - certainly none over the .40S&W in the same firearm.
Was the P229 "designed for the round", or adapted for it from 40SW? My recollection is the latter, but perhaps I am wrong.
My experience here is primarily with Glocks, and there are indeed comparatively more wear issues. I believe it was here at M4C that a colleague posted his own agencies experience with a few hundred of them.
while it does have somewhat more muzzle blast over other rounds, particularly the 9MM, and in some cases the .40, actual recoil is less than then the most common loadings of the .40. and while everyone acknowledges this is a trade-off to using the .40, no one uses it as a condemnation of the round. it has its uses and its compromises, just like any round.
This observation is usually made by trainers more than others, who see the effects of additional blast, shooter fatigue, and effects on performance. We could find examples where it's like and different from others in quantity, but it has a different quality, and effect.
diminished shooter performance in this case would only be relative to the 9MM standard loadings.
Not necessarily, as above.
sigmundsauer
11-25-08, 13:04
I'm guessing you're going to get some disagreement on this... :D
Doc GKR has repeatedly shown that in testing, the 357SIG has no advantages over the best loadings of 9MM in ballistic gelatin. this is a repeatable, quantifiable response and is not arguable.
however, anecdotal evidence indeed shows a very significant success ratio of this round, and I feel that terminal ballistics are just one piece of the formula that equals making a bad guy stop doing what it was that made you want to shoot them in the first place.
for all I know, the "increased muzzle blast and flash" may have as much to do with it as anything! that is, psychological state and perception on the part of the person being shot are quite as important as bullet performance in circumstances where there is no immediate incapacitation shot (CNS).
Although I have great respect for Doc Roberts and his work, testing bullets in jello is certainly valuable but it will never fully predict how a human will react to being shot from one bullet compared to another. Fully acknowledging that the relative differences between the best 9mm, .40 cal, .357 SIG and .45 ACP are pretty slim, one must still acknowledge that the basic laws of physics always apply. A 125 grain pill travelling 1120 fps will never accomplish the same physical work that another 125 grain pill can do at 1350 fps, period. Just because a JHP opens up quicker, slower, bigger than another is more proof about the bullet's design than it is demonstrating that actual work potential of the particular cartridge. Some bullets is good, some is bad, but all bullets is governed by fysics, yes? You just have to ask yourself whether the relative advantage of one over another are worth it for you. So, yes, I do not believe that I am making a leap of faith by concluding that at typical operating pressures the best 9mm will never be able to outclass the best .357 SIG.
Tim
sigmundsauer
11-25-08, 13:11
Huh? Isn't that pure conjecture? Did you work at Glock Austria when they were creating the 22 and 23? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to know how so many people "know" that Glock didn't do the 40 pistols right.
So help me out here.
M_P
The fact that Glock did little to beef up slide mass or even spring it more stiffly is proof enough that they thought the .40 would be OK in the 9mm platform gun. However, years of extended use have clearly demonstrated that Glock .40s don't last nearly as long as their 9mm little brothers. The .357 SIG was a matter of rebarreling, and nothing more. You don't have to be an Austrian engineer to understand that. Look at every other major pistol manufacturer of .40 pistols. Almost without exception they have all made heavier slides, with stronger recoil springs, and occasional modifications to the frame to handle the heavier recoiling caliber.
Tim
Off my state bid list:
.357 SIG 125 gr Speer Gold Dot: $281.37
.40 FED 180 gr Hydra-Shok: $213.46
.45 ACP Fed 230 gr HP $194.26
As to the work done by the .357 over a 9mm - does that translate into more effectiveness?
John_Wayne777
11-25-08, 13:42
As to the work done by the .357 over a 9mm - does that translate into more effectiveness?
If DocGKR's tests are to be believed (and I believe they are), no.
Alaskapopo
11-25-08, 14:54
And how do you account for the substantially beefed up slide mass on .357 SIG pistols that is usually built for heavy .40 bullets?....and the stiffer recoil spring rates? .357 SIG is meant to be shot in the pistols in which it is chambered. 9mm +P+ almost always results in measurably higher slide velocity that what the pistol was designed for. Your statement makes little sense.
Any .357 SIG loading can achieve 9mm +P+ velocities with equivalent bullet weights at a LOWER pressure....add that to increased slide mass and stiffer recoil springs and it will almost certainly outlast a 9mm, period. Glocks may be an exception as there is little difference in slide mass and spring rates between the two....and thus don't last as long in .40/.357 SIG.
Tim
It depends on the gun. The only guns with substantially beefed up slide mass is the Sig pistols. Glocks are pretty much identical in 357 sig and 9mm and in fact they are even sprung the same. (same recoil springs). 357 sig Glocks have been known to have issues with parts breaking and a far shorter service life as compared to their 9mm brothers.
Pat
Huh? Isn't that pure conjecture? Did you work at Glock Austria when they were creating the 22 and 23? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to know how so many people "know" that Glock didn't do the 40 pistols right.
So help me out here.
M_P
as far as "being there", no I was not. however, the design process and rush to get the .40S&W Glock into service before even S&W introduced their pistol chambered in their caliber is well documented. and I believe the rate of failure and repair is significantly higher for Glocks in .40S&W than 9MM. I do not know about .45.
With that in mind, the USSS lead the charge to the 357 Sig for executive protection. They were looking for a handgun that will stack the odds in their favor…
Yes, because we all know how many shootings their protection details are involved in... :rolleyes: (Not a jab at you, Buck.)
Performance on auto glass is a big driver (no pun intended) for some people/agencies. The NC Highway Patrol is pretty high on their .357 Sig's. I've been told that the terminal results of their OIS' have been pretty spectacular.
It depends on where and what you're buying. My sourcing, and bids, put 357SIG 1/4-1/3 higher than other service calibers. Add now specialty loads (green frangibles) and it's worse. Where the difference is minimal, it still adds up to substantial differences in total quantities consumed. Add now delivery times and inventory sustainment, and you get a better picture.
I see. I was just quoting commercial prices and availability of which I still think I'm correct.
Was the P229 "designed for the round", or adapted for it from 40SW? My recollection is the latter, but perhaps I am wrong.
don't remember... but I do remember when I bought my P229, at the time the 357SIG was introduced, that it was designed specifically around the higher pressure and slide velocity of at least the .40. but since they are similar in this regard, I don't place a lot of importance on it.
My experience here is primarily with Glocks, and there are indeed comparatively more wear issues. I believe it was here at M4C that a colleague posted his own agencies experience with a few hundred of them.
and with the .40 Glocks as well???
This observation is usually made by trainers more than others, who see the effects of additional blast, shooter fatigue, and effects on performance. We could find examples where it's like and different from others in quantity, but it has a different quality, and effect.
true. but as stated by others who have much more experience than I do, the recoil experience between the 357SIG and .40S&W are minor with the 357 actually exhibiting less, so why is there not more condemnation of the .40? it is simply quoted as a component of that caliber, not a liability.
in my experience, in swapping calibers in the same handgun, both are much more alike to each other than the 9MM, in standard loadings. if someone is recoil sensitive with the .40, I suggest they stick with the 9MM. moving up to the +P+ loadings of the 9MM, the differences start to disappear...
Although I have great respect for Doc Roberts and his work, testing bullets in jello is certainly valuable but it will never fully predict how a human will react to being shot from one bullet compared to another. Fully acknowledging that the relative differences between the best 9mm, .40 cal, .357 SIG and .45 ACP are pretty slim, one must still acknowledge that the basic laws of physics always apply. A 125 grain pill travelling 1120 fps will never accomplish the same physical work that another 125 grain pill can do at 1350 fps, period. Just because a JHP opens up quicker, slower, bigger than another is more proof about the bullet's design than it is demonstrating that actual work potential of the particular cartridge. Some bullets is good, some is bad, but all bullets is governed by fysics, yes? You just have to ask yourself whether the relative advantage of one over another are worth it for you. So, yes, I do not believe that I am making a leap of faith by concluding that at typical operating pressures the best 9mm will never be able to outclass the best .357 SIG.
Tim
I don't have ANY problem with DocGKR's work. his findings are controlled, repeatable, statistically significant, and essentially irrefutable. I'm not very smart but I am smart enough to let those who are actually professionals in the area tell me what is what. however, my uneducated suspicion (and that's all it is) is that there are other factors involved in a shooting that cause an individual to fall down and go boom.
specifically, the emotional and psychological state of the person being shot, including other dynamics of an encounter, leads me to FEEL that the POTENTIAL for the 357SIG to perform better in "real world" circumstances gives the benefit of whatever advantage to the faster round. otherwise, why is the .38SPL not considered as effective as the .38+P and .357MAG?? there has to be something there...
again, I shoot the 357SIG because I like it. In my own little mind I have concocted some reasons for that but I'm NOT about to criticize research which shows me that maybe my choice is based more on emotion than facts...
Yes, because we all know how many shootings their protection details are involved in... :rolleyes: (Not a jab at you, Buck.)
Performance on auto glass is a big driver (no pun intended) for some people/agencies. The NC Highway Patrol is pretty high on their .357 Sig's. I've been told that the terminal results of their OIS' have been pretty spectacular.
all told, a smaller diameter bullet is going to penetrate all mediums better than a larger diameter one. drive that bullet faster so there is more momentum and it will maintain its initial trajectory better and penetrate better yet.
however, with greater velocity, there is more force imparted back to the bullet and causes quicker deformation and greater expansion, so a tougher bullet design is needed.
the fact that a standard velocity 9MM bullet expands and penetrates the same as one that is driven faster indicates that it must be constructed differently.
fwiw, I'll take my chances with a stouter bullet being driven faster if I believe there is a chance I'm ever going to be required to shoot anything beyond a lightly clothed individual with no other obstructions, such as their hands/arms, bone, wristwatch, notebook, etc.
again, these are simply my reasons and have no basis in any methodology other than anecdotal, but it makes me feel good and and feel confident in my choice so there it is...
GLOCKMASTER
11-26-08, 17:11
Performance on auto glass is a big driver (no pun intended) for some people/agencies. The NC Highway Patrol is pretty high on their .357 Sig's. I've been told that the terminal results of their OIS' have been pretty spectacular.
RWK yes we are.;)
We have carried pistols chambered in .357 SIG since 2000 and have had excellent results. We are 3 for 3 so far this year. One shooting this year was through car glass and metal on a pickup. All rounds made it into the passenger area and six of the nine bullets found it's way into the perp. The deputies on the scene did not have such good results. According to the trooper, the deputies rounds never made it into the passenger compartment.
I cannot remember the exact numbers, but we have shot about twelve to fourteen people since 2000 and only one perp has survived. He will never walk again.
there is no point period to the .357 SIG that the +P 9mm cannot accomplish.
sigmundsauer
11-27-08, 10:33
I don't have ANY problem with DocGKR's work. his findings are controlled, repeatable, statistically significant, and essentially irrefutable. I'm not very smart but I am smart enough to let those who are actually professionals in the area tell me what is what. however, my uneducated suspicion (and that's all it is) is that there are other factors involved in a shooting that cause an individual to fall down and go boom.
specifically, the emotional and psychological state of the person being shot, including other dynamics of an encounter, leads me to FEEL that the POTENTIAL for the 357SIG to perform better in "real world" circumstances gives the benefit of whatever advantage to the faster round. otherwise, why is the .38SPL not considered as effective as the .38+P and .357MAG?? there has to be something there...
again, I shoot the 357SIG because I like it. In my own little mind I have concocted some reasons for that but I'm NOT about to criticize research which shows me that maybe my choice is based more on emotion than facts...
I think our difference of opinion is not as wide as it may seem. However, to suggest that a 124 grain 9mm at +p velocities can in some way match the terminal ballistics of a 125 grain bullet at .357 SIG velocities would be in complete violation of the laws of physics. If the 9mm slug expands to the same diameter as the .357 SIG and they somehow reach the same depth of penetration it is simply a result of the 9mm's hollow point being easier to open, which would undoubtedly suggest that less resistance was encountered in the process...or less tissue damage.
To use an extreme analogy. There is a distinct ballistic difference in shooting living flesh with a 125 gr .357 SIG impacting at approx 1350 fps and taking the same expanded slug, mounting on a stick and driving it in to a man's flesh with a hammer. Both would register nearly identical performances in jello if all that was considered was PCC, terminal expansion and penetration, but I find any conclusion dubious that would suggest that they are equally able to incapacitate a perp. There's more to firearm's ballistics that just terminal exp., pen, and PCC, IMO. I don't claim to be an expert but those "other" factors can't be simply dismissed and wished away as if they don't apply. Just because there is no reliable, repeatable way to scientifically test for them in 2008 is also no reason to ignore that their effects on a particular cartridge's effectiveness do not exist.
Tim
sigmundsauer
11-27-08, 10:45
It depends on the gun. The only guns with substantially beefed up slide mass is the Sig pistols. Glocks are pretty much identical in 357 sig and 9mm and in fact they are even sprung the same. (same recoil springs). 357 sig Glocks have been known to have issues with parts breaking and a far shorter service life as compared to their 9mm brothers.
Pat
SIG
HK
Beretta
Springfield Armory XD
Walther
All use heavier slides. These are the world class pistols that I have personal experience with that all use heavier slides in .40 than 9mm. Glock is one of the few who does not use significantly more slide mass AND the same recoil spring as 9mm. That's a problem.
Tim
Robb Jensen
11-27-08, 11:19
I understand that the 357 Sig 'approaches' the ballistics of the venerable .357 Magnum, yet isn't it just a 9 mm +P+? Anyone carry this caliber and shoot it regularly? I know several fed/state agancies issue 357 Sig cal. handguns, what is it they find charming in the 357 Sig?
The .357SIG has 125gr JHP Magnum like performance out of a 9mm size auto with much more capacity than a 4" DA revolver. Glock 31 being 15+1 capacity, Glock 32 13+1 capacity, SIG 226/229 12+1 capacity.....
With todays loads in 9mm +P+ yes it isn't all that much different than .357SIG. For most people the .357SIG is too expensive to shoot much so a 9mm makes much more sense.
.357SIG cost vs. 9mm cost for practice.
Where I work .357SIG 125gr FMJ Speer Lawman is $28.50/box (50 rounds) and 9mm 115gr FMJ Magtech is $11.95/box (50 rounds).
Glock 9mms, .40s and .357SIGs (same frame sizes) all have different weight slides, I've weighed them a few times. Yes Glocks of the same frame size do use the same recoil springs. I believe Glock just does this to same money.
Not to mention that there have been many modifications to Glock .40 since it was first introduced many years ago. I don't know of ANY pistol that will last as long as the same pistol in 9mm.
Huh? Isn't that pure conjecture? Did you work at Glock Austria when they were creating the 22 and 23? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to know how so many people "know" that Glock didn't do the 40 pistols right.
So help me out here.
M_P
Nice to know in case I'm ever attacked by a block of ballistic gelatin.
Doc GKR has repeatedly shown that in testing, the 357SIG has no advantages over the best loadings of 9MM in ballistic gelatin. this is a repeatable, quantifiable response and is not arguable.
there is no point period to the .357 SIG that the +P 9mm cannot accomplish.
it's 357SIG, there is no point in front of the 357.
I think our difference of opinion is not as wide as it may seem. However, to suggest that a 124 grain 9mm at +p velocities can in some way match the terminal ballistics of a 125 grain bullet at .357 SIG velocities would be in complete violation of the laws of physics. If the 9mm slug expands to the same diameter as the .357 SIG and they somehow reach the same depth of penetration it is simply a result of the 9mm's hollow point being easier to open, which would undoubtedly suggest that less resistance was encountered in the process...or less tissue damage.
To use an extreme analogy. There is a distinct ballistic difference in shooting living flesh with a 125 gr .357 SIG impacting at approx 1350 fps and taking the same expanded slug, mounting on a stick and driving it in to a man's flesh with a hammer. Both would register nearly identical performances in jello if all that was considered was PCC, terminal expansion and penetration, but I find any conclusion dubious that would suggest that they are equally able to incapacitate a perp. There's more to firearm's ballistics that just terminal exp., pen, and PCC, IMO. I don't claim to be an expert but those "other" factors can't be simply dismissed and wished away as if they don't apply. Just because there is no reliable, repeatable way to scientifically test for them in 2008 is also no reason to ignore that their effects on a particular cartridge's effectiveness do not exist.
Tim
I'm a 357SIG shooter and choose the round for my own reasons. Over the years I've consistently found myself on the outside of a growing circle of experts who consider the SIG to be hype.
they claim the ONLY consistent and repeatable way to predict the outcome in a shooting is to model what happens once the bullet enters the body. any other factors are so widely variant as to be statistically invalid. this is the scientific method. the best replicator we have of that is calibrated jello. I get that...
but I also get that there are mounting numbers of cases of anecdotal data the same as our friend from NC who say, "we shoot them with 357SIG, it works. others, not so much"...
how can you create scientific data out of this type of hearsay is not known but also, how can you ignore it?
Heavy Metal
11-27-08, 13:47
Nice to know in case I'm ever attacked by a block of ballistic gelatin.
A block of ballistic gleatin is a good substitute for a mostly bag of water.
A block of ballistic gleatin is a good substitute for a mostly bag of water.
until we can get calibrated ballistic meat, it's the best we can do...
Alpha Sierra
11-27-08, 17:03
People who discard real world operational data and rely exclusively on ballistic gel tests cannot possibly be trusted to have the definitive answer.
One must consider BOTH before drawing valid conclusions.
I bet the 125 grain .357 Magnum does not show dramatically better results in gel than any garden variety 9x19 +P, but the evidentiary body of actual shootings with both show a dramatic difference.
The .357 Sig has not amassed the volume of actual shootings that its revolver predecessor has, but in time it will and the evidence, I suspect, will be too hard to ignore by those who want to consider the whole picture.
it's 357SIG, there is no point in front of the 357.
Splitting hairs are we? Dear God...the bullet is still .357" in diameter (+/- whatever) :rolleyes:
Heavy Metal
11-27-08, 17:54
Actually, to further split hairs, it is .355 in diameter:D
until we can get calibrated ballistic meat, it's the best we can do...
I give it less than 10 years before we see that... we have the technology to do it now.
sigmundsauer
11-27-08, 18:03
I think the jello junkies can often times be just as narrow minded as those who continue to cite the Marshall/Sanow statistics, unable to appreciate other aspects to handgun ballistics. Everyone seems to collectively agree that something special happens at high power rifle velocities that somehow does not apply to pistols. OK, TSC is "wasted" energy at pistol velocities and doesn't cause any meaningful tissue damage. OK, I got it, but I refuse to believe that there is a black and white line at approximately 2000-2200 fps. I think it is most likely a transitional effect. Many rifle bullets are simply not designed to put the brakes on as abruptly as pistol bullets do, that has to have some affect on how the transmission of energy occurs in flesh. Maybe it will not cause more acute tissue damage but it certainly will communicate to the unlucky recipient to the maximum extent possible that he is shot. It may simply be the simple math that one hits harder than the other, and therefore is more likely to discourage aggression more rapidly than what is simply occurring physiologically, identical or not. I don't know, but I think shooting jello all day long certainly won't tell you that either. It's like the difference between getting a pass through shot with a broadhead versus a rifle slug. The broadhead is just as capable of inflicting the physiological damage but rarely drops a deer in the tracks in the way that is more commonly associated with being shot. I remember reading one observation from a jello junkie that was conducting pistol bullet tests and he remarked that the gelatin blocked jumped from the table when shot with the Speer GDHP .357 SIG. Measuring terminal expansion and penetration may appear to be the same as comparable high pressure 9mm rounds, but you don't get that effect typically with lower velocity rounds. What does that mean, if anything? I don't know. But I'm willing to trust my gut instincts more than most. If its faster and hits harder than another caliber, expands at least as equally well if not better, and penetrates as deeply, then its probably proportionally better.
Tim
Vom Kriege
11-27-08, 18:47
I have minimal experience with the .357 Sig round, but I was favorably impressed with it out of a Glock 31 when shooting plates at 50 yards. With other pistols/rounds, I have to figure out where to hold on the plates to hit consistently. With the G31, I was able to hold at the same point on the plate as I would at the 11 yard line.
I realize the above is no ballistic test by any means, but I was impressed with how well it shot. The only reason that I haven't added one is that I don't need yet another round to add to inventory.
.357 Sig is the absolute best solution , to a non-existent problem.
I think the jello junkies can often times be just as narrow minded as those who continue to cite the Marshall/Sanow statistics, unable to appreciate other aspects to handgun ballistics. Everyone seems to collectively agree that something special happens at high power rifle velocities that somehow does not apply to pistols. OK, TSC is "wasted" energy at pistol velocities and doesn't cause any meaningful tissue damage. OK, I got it, but I refuse to believe that there is a black and white line at approximately 2000-2200 fps. I think it is most likely a transitional effect. Many rifle bullets are simply not designed to put the brakes on as abruptly as pistol bullets do, that has to have some affect on how the transmission of energy occurs in flesh. Maybe it will not cause more acute tissue damage but it certainly will communicate to the unlucky recipient to the maximum extent possible that he is shot. It may simply be the simple math that one hits harder than the other, and therefore is more likely to discourage aggression more rapidly than what is simply occurring physiologically, identical or not. I don't know, but I think shooting jello all day long certainly won't tell you that either. It's like the difference between getting a pass through shot with a broadhead versus a rifle slug. The broadhead is just as capable of inflicting the physiological damage but rarely drops a deer in the tracks in the way that is more commonly associated with being shot. I remember reading one observation from a jello junkie that was conducting pistol bullet tests and he remarked that the gelatin blocked jumped from the table when shot with the Speer GDHP .357 SIG. Measuring terminal expansion and penetration may appear to be the same as comparable high pressure 9mm rounds, but you don't get that effect typically with lower velocity rounds. What does that mean, if anything? I don't know. But I'm willing to trust my gut instincts more than most. If its faster and hits harder than another caliber, expands at least as equally well if not better, and penetrates as deeply, then its probably proportionally better.
Tim
paragraphs. paragraphs are your friend...
.357 Sig is the absolute best solution , to a non-existent problem.
you and Palmguy related???
Standard 357 Sig is around 100 fps faster than any 9mm+P+ I've ever seen listed in product catalogs, in the 124-127 weights. If you think the +P and +P+ 9mm rounds serve a purpose then the 357 is an extension of those. If you are from the subsonic 147 9mm camp then the 357 is simply frivolous.
How does the subsonic 147 round make the 357 frivolous?
sigmundsauer
11-28-08, 10:04
paragraphs. paragraphs are your friend...
baby steps. i just learned how to make sentences and use periods. :D
varoadking
11-28-08, 10:33
it's 357SIG, there is no point in front of the 357.
Sure there is...
http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogProductDetails.aspx?categoryid=8&productid=119
How does the subsonic 147 round make the 357 frivolous?
You must not be from the 147 grain camp. Some people only look at expansion and penetration figures in ballistic gelatin when deciding what works the best. If bullet A expands to .65 inch and penetrates 13 inches and bullet B expands to .65 inch and penetrates 13 inches then those bullets have equal effectiveness, the fact that bullet B was 300-400 faster with 50% more energy doesn't factor in anywhere. Who knows who is right but I'm buying the bullet B kool-aid, call me crazy.;)
Could the 357 Sig's extra velocity allow it to penetrate more stuff like heavy clothes, car glass, auto bodies, etc. and then still show expansion through 13 inches of gel?
Does the extra velocity give it the same performance at 50-75 yds as the hot 9mm Luger has at the muzzle?
Would some of the recent bullet designs like bonded cores allow more weight retention after having passes through barriers mentioned above in the first statement?
I am grateful that the 357 Sig issuing agencies are satisfied with their weapon system performance. By the same token, every single agency that I am aware of that has acquired reliable pistols, diligently emphasizes frequent realistic lethal force training and tactics, and uses good quality service pistol ammunition in 9 mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP are also very happy with their shooting results. Good Training and Proper Psychological Preparedness coupled with Reliable Weapon Systems and followed by Frequent Practice is what will win the battles.
Is the 357 Sig bad? NO! It is a very reliably performing 9mm bullet, but it is does not offer significantly better terminal performance compared with the best current 9mm ammunition. When firing through heavy clothing, automotive steel panels, automobile windshield glass, interior wall segments, exterior wall segments, and plywood, both the 357 Sig Speer 125 gr JHP Gold Dot and 9mm Speer 124 gr +P JHP Gold Dot exhibited nearly identical penetration and expansion results THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT BARRIERS, as demonstrated by both our testing and that of the FBI. Most 357 Sig loadings, unless the fail to expand, do not offer excessive penetration; in fact, the exact opposite, under-penetration, can be a problem. Several .40 S&W and .45 ACP loads offered superior terminal performance through barriers compared to the 9mm and 357 Sig loads. In addition to having tested virtually all the handgun ammo available in lab settings, we have also had the opportunity to analyze numerous OIS incident forensic results and have not observed any greater incapacitation in actual shootings with users of 357 Sig loads compared to those users of 9 mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP who are using equivalent modern, well engineered ammunition.
The 357 Sig is not a bad cartridge, it just does not seem to offer anything that is not already available, at the price of less ammunition capacity than the similarly performing 9mm, as well as having greater recoil, muzzle flash, and wear on the weapon compared to other service pistol cartridges. On the other hand, since the 357 Sig is a modern cartridge benefiting from the latest engineering concepts, the bullets loaded with it have generally all been designed and tested using the latest FBI, IWBA, etc... testing protocols. This results in more robust terminal performance, less failures to expand, and thus greater tissue damage than will be found with older projectile designs. In addition, since according to data from Fackler and others, approximately 50% of shooting victims are incapacitated by psychological mechanisms, it is possible that the increased blast, flash, and noise of the 357 Sig enhances psychological perceptions of being shot.
In discussing this issue with an experienced ammunition engineer at one of the major ammo companies, he stated that he didn't particularly like the 357 Sig from an engineering perspective and described their difficulties in designing and producing 357 Sig ammunition which consistently performs as well as their ammunition in other service calibers. In particular, he felt his company's 357 Sig loads offered no better performance than their top 9 mm loads and stated their .40 S&W loads were superior in every respect to their 357 Sig ammunition. He firmly believes their .40 S&W offerings are the best performing duty ammunition his company produces.
We have found .40 S&W 180 gr to perform very well against barriers--better than the 9 mm and 357 Sig. The CHP used a variety of .357 Mag loads, depending upon what was available via the state contract. According to the published CHP test data, the .357 Magnum load used immediately prior to the CHP transition to .40 S&W was the Remington 125 gr JHP with an ave. MV of 1450 f/s from their duty revolvers--CHP has continued to report greater success with their .40 S&W 180 gr JHP than with the .357 Magnum 125 gr JHP they previously issued.
For many agencies, adoption of a new weapon system frequently necessitates more intensive training and instruction than might typically occur, thus officer's shooting skills might be at a higher peak than normal and qualification scores and hopefully officer involved shooting hits might increase. Having confidence in your handgun is a GREAT reason to choose a particular caliber and weapon system; if a 357 Sig works for you, go for it. Neither myself nor any of my colleagues choose to carry 357 Sig--quite a few of us carry 9 mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP. However, if I was at an agency that gave me unlimited 357 Sig ammo, then I would happily carry it! The bottom line is that all of the common service pistol calibers have loads that work--pick something that is reliable and works well for you, then practice......................a lot.
Vom Kriege
11-28-08, 23:12
I'd like to see it in a subgun platform. I bet the bottleneck cartridge would feed very good. The longer barrel would probably make even better use of the increased velocity.
you and Palmguy related???
I guess the Doc and I must be related too.
Is the 357 Sig bad? NO! It is a very reliably performing 9mm bullet, but it is does not offer significantly better terminal performance compared with the best current 9mm ammunition.
Like I said 357 Sig offers about the same performance as a good 9mm, and really is therefore a solution to a problem that was already solved by the 9mm.
Cameron
Alpha Sierra
11-29-08, 07:26
I guess the Doc and I must be related too.
Like I said 357 Sig offers about the same performance as a good 9mm, and really is therefore a solution to a problem that was already solved by the 9mm.
Cameron
If you think gelatin is the final word on bullet performance and that real world shootings can be discounted because there are too many variables, then yes, the .357 Sig is a marginal improvement over the 9 +P.
Kinda like the .357 Magnum was a marginal improvement over the .38 Special +P.
Excellent post Doc.
I think the "point" of this thread has long passed.
People have their own opinions and will not be swayed one way or another.
Thanks for keeping the discussion fairly civil....:cool:
Here in VA, both VASP and RMP use SIG 357's, the State uses P229's and Richmond uses P2022's.
Prior to the adoption of the 2022's, Richmond was issuing SIG P226's with first generation 9mm 147 gr. JHP's, and had several dismal failures in officer related shootings.
When they moved to Speer 125 gr. Gold Dot .357 SIG, the performance improved DRAMATICALLY, with every bad guy going down very quickly.
Would they have gotten the same results if they simply switched to Speer 124 gr. +P 9mm, who knows........probably.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-08, 08:00
What about short barreled pistols? Wouldn't the .357 SIG perform better than 9mm because of the reduced velocity drop vs the 9mm?
I personally am a 9mm guy so I really don't have a dog in this--it just strikes me as odd that the Secret Service adopted a round that was no better than the 9mm they were carrying. Of course, govt agencies do dumb stuff all the time, but this seems a bit strange.
I'm reminded of some studies done in the 1950s IIRC. The studies focused on worker productivity. The scientists raised the lighting levels in the workplace and productivity increased. Then the scientists lowered the lighting levels in the workplace and productivity increased.
Just about anything resulted in an increase in productivity. It was psychological. When people believed something was going to increase productivity the prophecy became self-fulfilling.
I think we pay a lot of attention to what the BG will do when shot, and don't pay enough attention to the shooter's psychology. If you believe the .357SIG is better then it will be, for you at least.
What about short barreled pistols? Wouldn't the .357 SIG perform better than 9mm because of the reduced velocity drop vs the 9mm?
I think that would depend on what type of powder was used and the bullet design.
I guess the Doc and I must be related too.
Like I said 357 Sig offers about the same performance as a good 9mm, and really is therefore a solution to a problem that was already solved by the 9mm.
Cameron
no. I was jerking your chain about your reply. one statement without any backup equals opinion. we don't lack for those...
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-08, 09:10
So you think the Secret Service adopted an entirely new round and replaced their guns so the guys in the field would get a psychological boost? A sort of copper jacketed lead sugar pill? Seems like they could have done the same thing by switching to .40 and done it more cheaply. I am not dinging you, your theory at least makes more sense than doing it for no reason.
As for .357 SIG performance in short barrels. I agree it would depend on powder and bullet design. I am simply asking, given the loading available from factories today, not theoretical loadings, isn't the .357 SIG going to perform better than 9mm from say a 3.6 inch barrel?
So you think the Secret Service adopted an entirely new round and replaced their guns so the guys in the field would get a psychological boost? A sort of copper jacketed lead sugar pill?
I think you have misunderstood my point. I was not trying to explain why the switch occurred, only why the switch almost always seems to pay off for the agency. (Granted there could be a lot of spin in order to justify the expenditure as well.)
Seems like they could have done the same thing by switching to .40 and done it more cheaply. I am not dinging you, your theory at least makes more sense than doing it for no reason.
Again, my theory isn't explaining the reasoning FOR the switch, only why the switch is almost always considered a "success." I remember reading in one gun rag a few years back, about an agency that switched back to 9mm from .40S&W. The switch was considered a success, and the successful shootings were attributed to better control of the weapon and therefore better placement. Was that the real reason? Or did people have more confidence? In themselves? In their employer? In the gun/ammo combo?
IIRC, the USSS had a different set of criteria than the FBI, which led to the adoption of the .357SIG. I used to have an article saved, 10 years and several computers ago, that said the USSS was looking for 10-13 inches of penetration in ballistics gel, vice 12-18 for the FBI.
As for .357 SIG performance in short barrels. I agree it would depend on powder and bullet design. I am simply asking, given the loading available from factories today, not theoretical loadings, isn't the .357 SIG going to perform better than 9mm from say a 3.6 inch barrel?
Again, you have to ask which load? What was it developed to do? You can't make a blanket comparison.
The Dumb Gun Collector
11-29-08, 10:37
Again, my theory isn't explaining the reasoning FOR the switch, only why the switch is almost always considered a "success." I remember reading in one gun rag a few years back, about an agency that switched back to 9mm from .40S&W. The switch was considered a success, and the successful shootings were attributed to better control of the weapon and therefore better placement. Was that the real reason? Or did people have more confidence? In themselves? In their employer? In the gun/ammo combo?
Oh, I gotcha.
Again, you have to ask which load? What was it developed to do? You can't make a blanket comparison.
Are there any loads where a 9mm performs better from a mid three inch barrel than a .357 SIG? Again, I don't know. I am asking, not arguing. It just seems odd that serious agencies like the Secret Service see something that we don't.
Are there any loads where a 9mm performs better from a mid three inch barrel than a .357 SIG? Again, I don't know. I am asking, not arguing. It just seems odd that serious agencies like the Secret Service see something that we don't.
I'm not trying to argue either. I just think there are too many variables. IIRC the USSS adopted the .357SIG about 10 years ago. How have powders/bullets changed in the intervening years? Has the USSS bothered to test them all? Some of them? Did any of them have anything to offer? Would a switch back to 9mm be cost-effective?
I just don't know.
John_Wayne777
11-29-08, 11:41
Are there any loads where a 9mm performs better from a mid three inch barrel than a .357 SIG? Again, I don't know. I am asking, not arguing. It just seems odd that serious agencies like the Secret Service see something that we don't.
Decision making in a government organization can be done on the basis of marketing hype just as much as a rational analysis of costs, benefits, and threat profiles. Such is life in government organizations.
Another thing to consider: A number of LE agencies make ammo and equipment selections based on a particular set of circumstances that don't necessarily translate well to other situations....such as the choice of the P90 by the USSS. The P90's compact size and ability to defeat soft armor may be critical advantages to the USSS presidential detail, but a SWAT cop in a large metropolitan police agency in the Sunshine State might not find the choice to be particularly good for his needs.
I don't know the process in the USSS that resulted in their adoption of the .357 sig, but their process might not translate well to the rest of us, or as DPort points out, it may have been based on facts that have changed since then. A few years ago I knew of at least two police officers who could not attend 40 hours of training because the department they worked for couldn't afford to provide them with the ammo for their .357 sig duty weapons. They would have been better served with the training than with the whiz-bang caliber.
My non-professional, low speed, didn't-even-stay-at-the-holiday-inn-last-night, 2 cents.
No refunds.
Jay Cunningham
11-29-08, 11:48
But you're the TIP!
It's been mentioned already in a roundabout way, but I'll toss this bit in for good measure. I am a 9mm guy, mainly b/c of cost and ease of maintaining my personal log train. Still, one of my favorite guns in recent years was a 226 in .357SIG. I never shot anybody with it- not even jello. Still, it was neat to me for a couple of reasons. First, it was much more accurate than my .40 guns in the exact same platform. It had little appreciable bullet drop out to about 85 yds. It was also more controllable and felt less snappy than +P out of my 9mm guns, again in the same platform. (to be fair, my 9mm 226 was an older gun with the lighter slide)
Ballistics aside, I found that the .357SIG was just more user-friendly and controllable than either my .40's or +P out of my 9mm gun. Just my .02.
I think the "point" of this thread has long passed.
People have their own opinions and will not be swayed one way or another.
...
Here in VA, both VASP and RMP use SIG 357's, the State uses P229's and Richmond uses P2022's.
Prior to the adoption of the 2022's, Richmond was issuing SIG P226's with first generation 9mm 147 gr. JHP's, and had several dismal failures in officer related shootings.
When they moved to Speer 125 gr. Gold Dot .357 SIG, the performance improved DRAMATICALLY, with every bad guy going down very quickly.
Would they have gotten the same results if they simply switched to Speer 124 gr. +P 9mm, who knows........probably.
Nah, I don't think the point has passed - you just have to sift through the emotional and frivolous arguments to get at the good points on either side.
I used to live in Richmond and remember when they were having issues with the 147's. The way I see it, it was their own fault, though. They, like many agencies, jumped on the 147-gr subsonic bandwagon way too early. Kind of like VASP jumped at the 10mm. IIRC, didn't they go from 9mm to 10mm, to .40, back to 9mm, then .357 Sig in less than 7 years, or so?
So you think the Secret Service adopted an entirely new round and replaced their guns so the guys in the field would get a psychological boost? A sort of copper jacketed lead sugar pill? Seems like they could have done the same thing by switching to .40 and done it more cheaply. I am not dinging you, your theory at least makes more sense than doing it for no reason.
It's not at all beyond the realm of possibility. Many agencies have changed or adopted entire platforms on almost a whim because something was new, or all the rage in the gun press -- 10mm anyone...? And the P90!? :rolleyes:
How have powders/bullets changed in the intervening years? Has the USSS bothered to test them all? Some of them? Did any of them have anything to offer? Would a switch back to 9mm be cost-effective?
I just don't know.
So many questions and so few answers eh Dport? :D
So many questions and so few answers eh Dport? :D
Story of my life.
threefeathers
11-29-08, 17:41
I've decided on the 357Sig round and have 4 handguns in it
1. P2K
2. Sig 229 (just gave it to my son)
3. Sig 226
4. Glock 32
I've found this round to be extremly and consistantly accurate. It wants to feed in even the most dirty weapon and it goes bang all the time.
I did this at the recommendation of a neighbor who is a retired Fed from an agancy that carries the round in H K's and Sigs.
Thanks for the great post, Doc.
ALCON- This is a great thread that would've gone far south many other places.
Kind of like VASP jumped at the 10mm. IIRC, didn't they go from 9mm to 10mm, to .40, back to 9mm, then .357 Sig in less than 7 years, or so?
Not quite.
VASP did go to the 10mm at the same time the FBI did. They had reliability issues with the S&W 10mm pistols and around late 1993, early 1994 they went to the Sig 228 in 9mm (using special high velocity, 147 gr. Federal Hydra-Shok ammo.) Around 1998, Sig approached VASP and asked if they would be interested in switching to the then new 357 Sig round. VASP politely declined. Sig counter-offered to swap out all current pistols for new Sig 229's in 357 Sig at zero cost. VASP agreed. Sig 229's were standard issue from 1998 until around 2003, when the started issuing the Sig 229 DAK pistols to new academy graduates and as the service life of the standard DA/SA 229's mandated replacement. As far as I know, the Speer 125 gr. Gold Dot is still the issue ammunition.
Regarding the .357 Sig, ballistics and gelatin testing can only tell you so much. I know what they say and do and I've seen the actual street results. The 357 Sig has excellent penetration characteristics which is one of the reasons for the caliber switch from 9mm. Most VASP shootings are around vehicles. The 357 Sig performed better than the 9mm at penetrating windshields, car doors, and sheet metal. One of the first shootings we had involved a BG trying to run over a Trooper. He fired one round and it went through the windshield, entered & exited the skull, through the headrest and stopped in the back seat in a perfect mushroom. The bullet looked like you just cut it out of a gelatin block. It was perfect.
Various other types of shootings have convinced me the 357 Sig is the real deal. So much so that I still choose to use it as an off duty load in my Glock 32.
FWIW,
USSA-1
I know I'm slightly necro-posting, but this topic is near to my heart so please forgive.
Actually most 357 sigs are simply 9mm's with an enlarged breach face and a different barrel and magazine. A 9mm that is fed a steady diet of +p+ ammo will last longer than a 357 sig fed a steady diet of full power 357 sig ammo.
As has been discussed subsequently, for most brands there is a substantial difference between their 9mm and 357 SIG pistol designs. I'm unaware of any data that would suggest there are a statistically significant number of 9mm guns which have gone tens of thousands of rounds with 9x19mm +p+ ammunition without noticeable parts breakages. I can point to plenty of agencies that have numerous 357 SIG chambered guns well past 20k and some with 100k through them.
You want a gun to last forever shooting 9mm +p+? Buy a .40/357 model and put a drop-in caliber replacement barrel in it.
however, anecdotal evidence indeed shows a very significant success ratio of this round, and I feel that terminal ballistics are just one piece of the formula that equals making a bad guy stop doing what it was that made you want to shoot them in the first place.
+1
I've got the highest possible respect for Doctor Roberts, and this is a discussion he and I have had in private in the past. I'm happy to concede that as far as gelatin testing is concerned, there is no substantial difference between the best 9mm loadings and the best 357 SIG loadings. If that is the basis upon which you choose caliber and ammo, the 357 seems without benefit.
My personal interaction with a number of agencies and officers, however, makes me believe that while gelatin testing is essential it is not the total answer. (I'm not suggesting DocGKR's comments and suggestions are based solely on jello shoots; simply reading his posts indicates this is not the case)
Having dealt with lots of 9mm agencies, lots of .40 agencies, and lots of 357 agencies I can say without question that a much higher percentage (100%, in fact) of the 357 agencies were satisfied with the terminal performance of their ammo compared to any other. TX DPS is a great example. After years of authorizing both 9mm and .45, they adopted the 357 across the board. Their findings were that not only did the 357 stop BGs more effectively than the 9mm, it did so better than the 45.
Huh? Isn't that pure conjecture? Did you work at Glock Austria when they were creating the 22 and 23? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to know how so many people "know" that Glock didn't do the 40 pistols right.
Glock developed the earliest 22/23 within weeks of the SAAMI spec being produced, in a race to beat S&W to market. As has been argued here countless times, quite a few people see significantly lower durability and reliability with Glock .40's compared to (a) Glock 9mm's and (b) other brands' 40-cal pistols.
It depends on where and what you're buying. My sourcing, and bids, put 357SIG 1/4-1/3 higher than other service calibers.
While civilian pricing might be different, there is no question that LE pricing for 357 SIG is extremely high compared to other calibers. The actual cost to manufacture 357 SIG ammo is higher, thus the pricing LE gets has to be higher. There is also a major supply-demand issue, since so many more agencies choose 40 than 357. Admittedly, that's pretty meaningless unless you're planning to buy millions of rounds per year. :cool:
I'm aware of only two agencies that have dropped the 357 SIG in favor of a different caliber (something that cannot be said for 9, 40, or 45). One was due to cost of ammo. Some very high profile federal agencies have also had top-level discussions considering moving away from it because of budget restraints, as well. So far, their extremely high satisfaction with the round's performance have staved off the change.
(the other department which switched, by the way, was NJ Fish & Wildlife ... Glock could not get its 357 models to run to the department's satisfaction and due to NJ law the only guns that the agency could trade into were other Glocks; so while they wanted to stick with the caliber, they got 9mm Glocks instead)
Another thing Skintop mentioned, but which I didn't quote, was delivery times. I can get 50k of 9mm or .40 with a few week's notice, usually, unless I want a very specific SKU that isn't in inventory or isn't planned for production that month. Buying 50k rounds of 357 can be a trick unless you're a big agency that gets regular shipments.
Was the P229 "designed for the round", or adapted for it from 40SW? My recollection is the latter, but perhaps I am wrong.
At least according to the engineers at SIG I worked with (who were part of the project back then), the P229 was developed simultaneous to the early work on the 357 cartridge and was tweaked during the early design stages to be 357-friendly.
My experience here is primarily with Glocks, and there are indeed comparatively more wear issues.
As mentioned previously regarding NJFW and also the painful years-long experience NM State Police had, the 357-cal Glocks have substantial service life issues. At least as of two years ago, the G31/G32/G33 were the only guns Glock would not warrant past 20k rounds (they've warranted 40-cal Glocks to 40k for some agencies).
Glock has made a number of changes to the 40/357 frames to improve durability, but I know very few people who have ever seen one climb past 10k without some problem. I'd be interested to hear USSA-1's experience since he likes them and I imagine he's shot his more than a little bit. :cool:
This observation is usually made by trainers more than others, who see the effects of additional blast, shooter fatigue, and effects on performance. We could find examples where it's like and different from others in quantity, but it has a different quality, and effect.
A test I've performed more times than I can count:
Get two identical slides, one in 40 and one in 357, that will fit on a particular frame (keeps trigger pull, ergos identical).
Put them on a table side by side with boxes of full power 40 ammo and full power 357 ammo.
Let shooters try some kind of drill that requires both accuracy and speed, like running a plate rack.
I'd say well over 50% of the people I've put through this have had better results with the 357 SIG top end. The more experienced/skilled the shooter, the more likely he is to prefer the shootability of the 357. Essentially, the faster moving, lighter bullet creates more vertical slide motion but substantially less torquing than the 40, which makes sight tracking easier or, for shooters who aren't tracking their sights, much more predictable timing/placement of the front sight.
The majority of the rest see no real meaningful performance difference. This tends to fall under the "no matter what gun you shoot, if you're mediocre you'll be mediocre" category.
However, some people (maybe 10-15%) translate the blast/noise into "recoil" and have a much higher propensity to flinch with the 357. For them, the difference (in favor of the 40) is much more pronounced.
So while some will shoot 357 a bit better about an equal number won't shoot it any worse, a meaningful percentage will be much worse with it. Is it a training issue? Sure. But training issues still cost money and time to fix.
The 357 Sig is not a bad cartridge, it just does not seem to offer anything that is not already available, at the price of less ammunition capacity than the similarly performing 9mm, as well as having greater recoil, muzzle flash, and wear on the weapon compared to other service pistol cartridges.
FWIW, while I was at SIG we performed some testing which showed that the hotter 40 rounds (such as the ICE/CBP round and one similar to what FBI is now issuing) actually produced greater slide velocity and slightly accelerated wear & tear compared to typical 357 loads. But beyond that, I'd have to agree that 357 can be tough on guns.
In discussing this issue with an experienced ammunition engineer at one of the major ammo companies, he stated that he didn't particularly like the 357 Sig from an engineering perspective and described their difficulties in designing and producing 357 Sig ammunition which consistently performs as well as their ammunition in other service calibers.
By "performs as well" do you mean in terminal sense or from a reliability/accuracy standpoint or in terms of % of QC rejects?
The last I can certainly believe; making 357 SIG ammo is much more complicated due to the short bottleneck design. Things like neck tension and shoulder dimensions can be challenging. This is one reason why ATK no longer produces Blazer in 357, sadly ... I still have a few rounds of it lying around and it was very good ammo. Part of the problem lies in the fact that the round is properly headspaced off the mouth instead of the shoulder (unlike most bottleneck cartridges).
I have no doubt that there are plenty who believe that it's not as good from a terminal perspective, I simply disagree personally.
As far as reliability and accuracy go, though, that has absolutely not been my experience or any kind of complaint I've heard from any agency I've dealt with. On the contrary, when taking lots of brands/models of pistols and shooting lots of brands/SKUs of ammo, I've seen better, more consistent accuracy from the 357 SIG than 9mm, 40 S&W, or 45 Auto.
Not to throw stones, but one senior engineer at one major ammo company once told me the 45 GAP they made was by far the best ammo anyone could buy for LE use. And I don't even want to tell you some of the things gun company engineers have told me over the years ... :rolleyes:
One thing that might be worth considering, however, is that as ammo prices continue to rise and agency budgets continue to shrink, more and more LE agencies may switch away from the 357. Once critical mass is lost, the 357 could go the way of the 10mm.
Finally, I'll point out another interesting note regarding the 357. I know quite a few folks at agencies that would happily trade out their 357's for any number of "hot" 9mm loads (RA9TA, the NYPD Gold Dot load, etc.). However, regardless of whether the 9mm would actually be better for their agency, they are powerless to make such a change because the perception among officers/agents is that they'd be giving up a Real Fightin' Bullet for a Wimpy Nine. It's one thing for enthusiasts to discuss the minutiae of such things, but telling your x-thousand officers, "Trust me, it really works great regardless of what folks say!" isn't going to go over well. One high profile agency I've been dealing with a lot over the past few years came very close to making the jump to 9mm for the very reasons DocGKR mentioned -- capacity, blast/noise, and cost -- but in the end no one wanted to be the guy who signed off on it. Why? The first time they had an OIS and the 9mm failed to vaporize the BG instantaneously, that decision maker's head would be served up on a silver platter as being responsible for choosing an inferior round.
Human politics > logic.
I don't want to give the wrong impression, I don't think the 357 SIG is so much better than anything else that everyone should switch immediately. Sort of echoing a comment DocGKR made, I would only carry it if someone gave me a supply of it that met all my shooting needs. But (definitely not echoing DocGKR :cool:) if money were no object, I'd carry a 357 over anything else. Call me shaman, but I believe in the voodoo. :cool:
I know I'm slightly necro-posting, but this topic is near to my heart so please forgive....
I've got the highest possible respect for Doctor Roberts, and this is a discussion he and I have had in private in the past. I'm happy to concede that as far as gelatin testing is concerned, there is no substantial difference between the best 9mm loadings and the best 357 SIG loadings. If that is the basis upon which you choose caliber and ammo, the 357 seems without benefit....
My personal interaction with a number of agencies and officers, however, makes me believe that while gelatin testing is essential it is not the total answer. (I'm not suggesting DocGKR's comments and suggestions are based solely on jello shoots; simply reading his posts indicates this is not the case)...
Having dealt with lots of 9mm agencies, lots of .40 agencies, and lots of 357 agencies I can say without question that a much higher percentage (100%, in fact) of the 357 agencies were satisfied with the terminal performance of their ammo compared to any other. TX DPS is a great example. After years of authorizing both 9mm and .45, they adopted the 357 across the board. Their findings were that not only did the 357 stop BGs more effectively than the 9mm, it did so better than the 45....
I don't want to give the wrong impression, I don't think the 357 SIG is so much better than anything else that everyone should switch immediately. Sort of echoing a comment DocGKR made, I would only carry it if someone gave me a supply of it that met all my shooting needs. But (definitely not echoing DocGKR :cool:) if money were no object, I'd carry a 357 over anything else. Call me shaman, but I believe in the voodoo. :cool:
Necro-posting... LOL!
I agree, to the word, with what you have here. however nebulous, emotional, and unsupported by any recognized testing mode my reasons for choosing the 357SIG may be, they are my reasons... and I love it.
I love shooting it. it gives me a warm feeling in that place where warm feelings are welcome.
and I love it when I'm shooting IDPA and a group from the next bay over come walking up asking, "what the hell is that you're shooting?, we can hear that thing from clear across the range!!" :D
Sounds to me like LE would be well served if the ammo companies manufactured a .357 "Lite" for training purposes. Say a 124 grain bullet at 1250 fps. This would greatly reduce wear and tear on guns, would equal 9mm +P ballistics (but at lower pressure) and would probably be close enough in recoil/handling characteristics to the real deal so as to not compromise training too badly. If 1250 is too big of a delta, ramp it up to 1300, but with the larger case, you'd get lower pressure with this laod than practically any 9mm +P. Just a thought.
jmart -- FWIW, the 125gr Blazer (when it was still in production) was rated at 1,300fps. It was very accurate and completely reliable in my limited experience (10k rounds).
http://greent.com/40Page/images/357blazer125tmj.jpg
(5-shot group at 25yd; the 1.34" notation is before the caliber was subtracted from the outer-edge to outer-edge measurement ... group size was 0.99")
However, for technical reasons, it was harder for them to maintain proper neck tension on the bullet so setback was a real issue. I had a couple of rounds in that 10k shipment which had bullets loose in their case right out of the box.
jmart -- FWIW, the 125gr Blazer (when it was still in production) was rated at 1,300fps. It was very accurate and completely reliable in my limited experience (10k rounds).
http://greent.com/40Page/images/357blazer125tmj.jpg
(5-shot group at 25yd; the 1.34" notation is before the caliber was subtracted from the outer-edge to outer-edge measurement ... group size was 0.99")
However, for technical reasons, it was harder for them to maintain proper neck tension on the bullet so setback was a real issue. I had a couple of rounds in that 10k shipment which had bullets loose in their case right out of the box.
Nice group. I can imagine with an aluminum case, you would have problems with neck tension. But I was speaking of bringing out a brass-cased line of practice ammo that was downloaded a tad. Might not cost any less, but it would save wear and tear on guns.
Guys that I know that reload for it maintain that as long as you minimize mouth flare and use a crimping die (the Lee FCD has a loyal following), you'll be OK. I'm not sure why ammo companies would have difficulty with this.
I'm not sure why ammo companies would have difficulty with this.
For mass production, it's all about acceptable margins/tolerances. Anything that you need to do "carefully" means either more money in production or more money (and more rejections) at the QC stage. My understanding is that it is also more expensive to extrude the case compared to a tapered or straight walled cartridge, which is an expense not shared by reloaders.
Great posts, I enjoyed reading this thread.
I'd be interested to hear USSA-1's experience since he likes them and I imagine he's shot his more than a little bit.
Not as much as you'd think. I just checked my records and I'm a bit over 3,000 rds. on my 32, but it still runs like a champ. I imagine it will be quite a while before I push this one over 20K.
The more experienced/skilled the shooter, the more likely he is to prefer the shootability of the 357. Essentially, the faster moving, lighter bullet creates more vertical slide motion but substantially less torquing than the 40
For me, this is 100% true. My Glock 32 tracks much easier and more consistently than the 23 (40S&W.) I don't notice the pistol cycling any more or less violently, but you do get a little more of a concussive blast when round detonates.
It's like shooting a 38 super. You get an increased blast, but the recoil is about the same as a 9mm.
USSA-1
Not as much as you'd think. I just checked my records and I'm a bit over 3,000 rds. on my 32, but it still runs like a champ. I imagine it will be quite a while before I push this one over 20K.
If you keep an eye on the rails, it should be fine. Were it my gun, I'd probably swap out the recoil spring, takedown lever, takedown spring, and perhaps even locking block every 5k rounds just to guarantee maximum lifecycle.
I'll let all of you in on a secret. At the SHOT Show, SIG will introduce another new pistol cartridge: The .44 Sig Auto Pistol - aka the .44 SAP!
Parabellum9x19mm
12-09-08, 19:42
I'd like to see it in a subgun platform. I bet the bottleneck cartridge would feed very good. The longer barrel would probably make even better use of the increased velocity.
i couldn't agree more.
the .357SIG seems perfect for a pistol caliber carbine.
i think the Microtech AUG Carbine will be availible in 10mm and .357SIG. afraid i won't be purchasing that weapon, but if i did, i would want it in .357SIG
varoadking
12-09-08, 19:51
I think a far better question would be "What's the point of 9x18mm"...though as far as I can tell, there'd be no good answer...
I am a big fan of the .357SiG round...though I find myself shooting .40S&W more lately...likely because of the platform - primarilly 3rd Generation Smiths.
Next to Glocks, 3rd Generation Smiths - DAO's for the most part - are my clear favorite, though I shoot my SiG's better than any other brand. Go figure - I guess I like projects...
It seems that .357sig performs better against auto glass than the other calibers. And because of this, you see many state patrol agencies switching to .357sig because of the fact that troopers mostly deal with people in a car.
It seems that .357sig performs better against auto glass than the other calibers. And because of this, you see many state patrol agencies switching to .357sig because of the fact that troopers mostly deal with people in a car.
Thats my understanding for one reason why the Texas Dept of Public Safety as well as the NC SHP both went to it.
John_Wayne777
12-11-08, 20:32
It seems that .357sig performs better against auto glass than the other calibers. And because of this, you see many state patrol agencies switching to .357sig because of the fact that troopers mostly deal with people in a car.
I think the IWBA folks like DocGKR have done pretty extensive testing of the .357 sig through laminated windshield glass...to the best of my knowledge I don't remember hearing about a significant performance difference over the 9mm in that regard. I could be wrong, though...
I've done a few vehicle shoots with the .357 sig (in training) and the .357 sig rounds have shown the same deflection that similar 9mm rounds exhibited through windshields.
I carry the HK P2000 357 Sig with LEM trigger. Recently, I shot a large boar possum trying to snack on my neighbor's laying hens. The 125gr GoldDot Double Tap bullet expanded violently as it exited the carcas and caused a 2 inch diameter exit wound. The only conclusion I can draw is that the animal had a humane death. The extreme damage to the possum's body surpassed what I had predicted.
Lot of myth surrounding this issue...Let’s compare apples to apples—below is factory test data from various Winchester loads in different calibers, Ranger-T as well as Ranger Bonded. How does the 357Sig compare in intermediate barrier penetration compared to the other service calibers?
FBI Test Protocols:
Bare Gelatin at 10ft
Denim, 4 Layers at 10ft
Heavy Clothing at 10ft
Steel, 2 pieces of 20 gauge at 10ft
Wallboard, 2 pieces of 1/2" gypsum board at 10ft
Plywood, 1 piece of 3/4" AA fir plywood at 10ft
Automobile Glass, 1 piece 1/4" laminated safety glass set at a 45 degree angle with an offset of 15 degrees at 10ft
9mm 127gr +P+ RA9TA at 1250fps:
Bare Gel: 12.3”/.64”
Denim: 12.2”/.68”
Heavy Cloth: 12.2”/.68”
Wallboard: 12.1”/.66”
Plywood: 12”/.68”
Steel: 20.5”/.40”
Auto Glass: 9.4”/.48”
9mm 147gr RA9T at 990fps:
Bare Gel: 13.9”/.65”
Through Denim: 14.5”/.66”
Through Heavy Cloth: 14”/.66”
Through Wallboard: 15”/.67”
Through Plywood: 14.8”/.62”
Through Steel: 17”/.45”
Through Auto Glass: 10.8”/.52”
357Sig 125gr RA357SIGT at 1350fps:
Bare Gel: 10.9”/.63”
Denim: 12.1”/.66”
Heavy Cloth: 10.7”/.69”
Wallboard: 15.4”/.48”
Plywood: 12.2”/.66”
Steel: 23.4”/.41”
Auto Glass: 10.3”/.49”
.40S&W 180gr RA40T at 990fps:
Bare Gel: 13.8”/.60”
Denim: 14.3”/.70”
Heavy Cloth: 13.4”/.64”
Wallboard: 13.1”/.66”
Plywood: 15.1”/.64”
Steel: 17”/.52”
Auto Glass: 12”/.61”
.45ACP 230gr +P RA45TP at 990fps:
Bare Gel: 13.2”/.79”
Denim: 15.2”/.78”
Heavy Cloth: 15.7”/.78”
Wallboard: 13.8”/.75”
Plywood: 14.6”/.77”
Steel: 20.6”/.53”
Auto Glass: 13.6”/.60”
How about bonded bullets?
9mm 124gr +P RA9BA at 1180 fps:
Bare Gel: 12.6”/.68”
Denim: 18.7”/.54”
Heavy Cloth: 18.2”/.56”
Wallboard: 11.9”/.64”
Plywood: 15.8”/.57”
Steel: 22”/.42”
Auto Glass: 12.7”/.58”
9mm 147gr RA9B at 995fps:
Bare Gel: 14.7”/.62”
Denim: 16.5”/.59”
Heavy Cloth: 15.8”/.58”
Wallboard: 16.7”/.56”
Plywood: 16.5”/.59”
Steel: 19”/.42”
Auto Glass: 12.6”/.55”
357Sig 125gr RA357SB at 1350fps:
Bare Gel: 12.5”/.59”
Denim: 15.9”/.57”
Heavy Cloth: 16.9”/.55”
Wallboard: 14.7”/.62”
Plywood: 16.0”/.60”
Steel: 21.7”/.44”
Auto Glass: 12.8”/.62”
.40S&W 180gr RA40B at 1070fps:
Bare Gel: 14.8”/.67”
Denim: 21.8”/.51”
Heavy Cloth: 19”/.59”
Wallboard: 16.7”/.61”
Plywood: 15.5”/.62”
Steel: 14.8”/.55”
Auto Glass: 12.4”/.63”
.45ACP 230gr RA45B at 905fps:
Bare Gel: 14”/.73”
Denim: 15.8”/.67”
Heavy Cloth: 15.8”/.68”
Wallboard: 14.7”/.69”
Plywood: 16.5”/.74”
Steel: 14.8”/.56”
Auto Glass: 12.5”/.66”
Doc,
Got any testing info for the Speer Gold Dot ammunition?
That's all we've ever used and based on my personal experience, it's performed better than most. I don't expect any earth shattering revelations, but it would be nice to see how it stacked up
USSA-1
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.