View Full Version : Advice on .357 sig please
I have a Glock 27 with a 9mm conversion barrel. I find myself in the woods of PA and NY and Virginia on occasion and am looking for a setup that is more woods appropriate. I don't have a lot of money. My first thought was to trade in my G27 for a G23 and buy a .357 sig conversion barrel for those woods trips. I have lots of .40 cal ammo I could still use. I would only buy a few boxes of .357 sig for woods carry. Are the ballistics of the .357 sig on 4 legged PA or NY animals that much better than the .40 or should I stick with the .40? Could I get away with carrying a 9mm under these circumstances for more round capacity? I used to have a .45 but I had to sell it to raise some cash. I have too much invested in .40 cal ammo to switch totally away from that caliber. Thanks for helping me decide.
Have you read this: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887?
Why do you think a .357 Sig would be more effective against PA and NY animals than .40?
Thanks. I am new at this and not very good at the search feature. The graph makes it look like 9mm is pretty much just as effective. I looked around and saw your sticky. Am I reading that correctly? Thanks again for your help.
Stick with the .40 in a good 180gr JHP. My favorite is the Federal HST 180gr. Bigger hole and deeper penetration than the .357sig. The greater momentum of the 180gr bullet is also superior at damaging internal bone structure, punching through windshields, a sofa, or other intermediate barriers.
The one area where the .357sig does better than the other common calibers is shooting sheet metal and other hard outter surfaces. Unless you are battling robots or large lobsters, stick with the .40.
Thanks. I can save some $$ then and not get the .357 sig barrel, UNLESS anyone thinks I'll need it for the motorcycle trips to Maine and Lobster hunting <G>. Happy Holidays to all.
Alaskapopo
12-24-09, 17:11
I have a Glock 27 with a 9mm conversion barrel. I find myself in the woods of PA and NY and Virginia on occasion and am looking for a setup that is more woods appropriate. I don't have a lot of money. My first thought was to trade in my G27 for a G23 and buy a .357 sig conversion barrel for those woods trips. I have lots of .40 cal ammo I could still use. I would only buy a few boxes of .357 sig for woods carry. Are the ballistics of the .357 sig on 4 legged PA or NY animals that much better than the .40 or should I stick with the .40? Could I get away with carrying a 9mm under these circumstances for more round capacity? I used to have a .45 but I had to sell it to raise some cash. I have too much invested in .40 cal ammo to switch totally away from that caliber. Thanks for helping me decide.
I am from Alaska so the animals I have to worry about in the woods are big and mean and you would not want to shoot them with any of the rounds you mentioned unless you had to. I recommend you stick with what you have for general defense against people and get a large bore magnum revolver for wood carry like a 4 inch 629 mountain gun in 44mag.
Pat
GlockCop525
12-24-09, 17:21
.357 is like 9mm on crack, and for the price...i wouldnt really deem it worth it. All the state troopers that I bullshit with hate it, would rather have either a 9 or a .45
I find myself in the woods of PA and NY and Virginia on occasion and am looking for a setup that is more woods appropriate.
New York State is kind of "funny" about handgun laws. Out of state pistol permits are almost unknown unless of course you have a strong political connection in high places.
Deciding on the "right caliber" may be a moot point. Without the right permit you may have more to fear from the State's criminal justice system than from the four-legged critters out in the woods. Last time I checked, carrying a a handgun in New York without the correct permit is a felony.
If you go to New York State carrying a handgun without a permit, don't get caught! ;)
Yes. You are right about that. I picked NY and PA to give everyone an idea of what we'd be encountering. We unload at the border. One of us carries an empty gun in each saddlebag and the other carries ammo in one saddlebag and empty (10 round limit) magazines in the other saddlebag. That way, none of us has a gun + ammo + magazine on him. We used to like the Holiday Valley ski area in the summer with nice roads and bars to walk to but have heard horror stories about NY police so we've been venturing down to VA and W VA more often. When February comes, doing the Blue Ridge Parkway will be possible. Thanks for the reminder.
That way, none of us has a gun + ammo + magazine on him.
I wouldn't want to get caught in New York with an unregistered pistol, even if it wasn't loaded. Make sure the guns are in somebody else's saddle bag.
By the way, who is guarding the guns in the saddle bag while you and your friends are off in the bar? It sounds like it could be easy pickings for a thief.
We know New York is a PITA. That's why we rarely even go through there anymore. We rely on Federal Law to protect us when traveling through NY. We only stopped there once and felt uncomfortable doing it. We both have harleys with hard saddle bags and locks on them and alarms on the bikes if anyone touches them. Under federal law, we are allowed to transport through NY (despite what NY thinks) if we carry in a certain way and are permitted to carry in the State we originate from and are allowed to carry in our destination State. With the advice of a local attorney he believes a 1 night stop not far off the highway does meet the requirements of federal law. Like I said, we did it once. We now pretty much avoid NY if at all possible. Thanks again for the heads up. You can never be too careful out there. To get back on topic, I'll be carrying 180 gr .40 cal JHP's as recommended and not bother with the .357 sig conversion barrel.
Alaskapopo
12-26-09, 14:00
You are allowed to transport firearms through any state for the purpose of travel to another state. However that does not give you the right to carry said firearms on your person or unsecured in your vehicle.
Pat
Agreed. We unload and pack and separate and lock at the border when entering NY. I carry both guns with no mags and no ammo locked up in their own box. Each box is then further locked in its own saddlebag. My friend carries the mags locked up in 1 saddlebag with ammo locked in his other saddlebag. If we ever did encounter a bear, it would take us the better part of 30 minutes to unlock and assemble everything to have a weapon. I should say we were stopped on motorcycles by a herd of buffalo transporting their young across a road in Yellowstone. There was 1 car between us and the buffalo. To be stopped on a motorcycle not 50 feet from male buffalo protecting their young really got our hearts racing. We were in Yellowstone so we couldn't carry but that piqued my interest in loads that were effective against 4 legged creatures. I know the .40 won't work against buffalo but we do get out into deep woods in the east, hence my original question.
Stick with the .40 in a good 180gr JHP. My favorite is the Federal HST 180gr. Bigger hole and deeper penetration than the .357sig. The greater momentum of the 180gr bullet is also superior at damaging internal bone structure, punching through windshields, a sofa, or other intermediate barriers.
The one area where the .357sig does better than the other common calibers is shooting sheet metal and other hard outter surfaces. Unless you are battling robots or large lobsters, stick with the .40.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7qU09eo1Bk
I found this video on youtube, thought it was a pretty good direct comparison regarding sheet-metal/hard outer surfaces, etc.
You don't have the necessary clearance for me to divulge information with regards to the anti-lobster operations I am involved in. Let's just say that I never stay in one place for long, I have done this kind of thing at least 87 times, and I'm recognized by Holiday Inn staff nation-wide. :cool:
(Since someone new is here, the above is a funny.)
Continuing my research on the 357SIG, I have concluded:
Permanent wound is the same as other rounds in its class (9mm, .40, etc). However, using the TX DPS load, it tends to penetrate a couple of inches deeper than these other calibers.
It is hell on watermellons and fun to shoot.
The recoil isn't what people try to say it is. The "blast" and noise is significantly more pronounced than the other rounds in its class, through.
The only thing that has me wondering about the round is this:
I have read a lot of OIS's, annual firearm discharge reports, first-hand accounts, etc. and have yet to see where the 357SIG has "failed miserably". By failed miserably, I mean taken more than a few shots to the thoracic cavity to put a violent offender down. I have read many accounts for the .40, 9mm, and .45 along this line, but not a single one for the 357SIG. The 357SIG also (not that it matters), seems to kill whoever is hit by it. I am sure not always, obviously, but based on what I read, it does this more than the other rounds. The 357SIG has been out for a while now. Have I just not been privy to a horrific failure? Has anyone heard of the round "having no effect" on someone after a few solid hits like we have all heard of the .45/.40/9mm doing?
The round has been out too long for it not to have it's own handfull of horror stories if it is just "another option" to the .40/.45/9mm. Is anyone privy to a failure as such?
I have read a lot of OIS's, annual firearm discharge reports, first-hand accounts, etc. and have yet to see where the 357SIG has "failed miserably". By failed miserably, I mean taken more than a few shots to the thoracic cavity to put a violent offender down. I have read many accounts for the .40, 9mm, and .45 along this line, but not a single one for the 357SIG. The 357SIG also (not that it matters), seems to kill whoever is hit by it. I am sure not always, obviously, but based on what I read, it does this more than the other rounds. The 357SIG has been out for a while now. Have I just not been privy to a horrific failure? Has anyone heard of the round "having no effect" on someone after a few solid hits like we have all heard of the .45/.40/9mm doing?
The round has been out too long for it not to have it's own handfull of horror stories if it is just "another option" to the .40/.45/9mm. Is anyone privy to a failure as such?
The .40S&W was created in 1990. The .357sig was created in 1994. The .357 Magnum was created in 1934 and it has better ballistics than the .357sig.
If you've ever read any of Dr. Fackler, or any of the IWBA works it explains the widespread adoption of the .357 Magnum by law enforcement in the 1960s and 1970s. The hollow point didn't really get underway until this time period. Ammunition manufacturers did not start testing their hollow point designs until the early 1990s. Prior to that, they used water tanks.
A hollow point expands through hydraulic pressure. When a hollow point bullet begins penetrating tissue, the water in the tissue is being forced into the hollow point. Water does not compress, so the easiest escape route is through the sides of the bullet which causes the expansion. However, human tissue is not 100% water. Therefore, when ammunition manufacturers used water tanks to test their ammunition it was testing much better than it was working in the field.
Lower veloctiy calibers like the 9mm, .38spl, and .45acp were having expansion reliability problems in actual shootings(because human tissue is not 100% water) due to being designed around the water tank. However, the high veloctiy of the .357 Magnum impacted the tissue with enough kinetic energy to allow for reliable expansion of these early hollow point designs in human tissue.
So what was confused as "energy dump", or "knockdown power" of the .357 Magnum was actually just a much more reliable cartridge for causing good expansion and penetration. With an expanded bullet, you get a wide waddcutter profile that crushes tissue much more effectively. However, with modern day ammo in which the design is refined around the ballistic gel test(much closer to actual tissue) expansion is much more reliable with the slower velocity calibers. However, as good as the .357 Magnum was, it did experience a number of failures to stop when shot placement was less than ideal. The same would apply to the .357sig should shot placement be off.
Using .357sig is another alternative in my opinion. I do like the fatter frontal area of the .357sig which probably helps with waddcutting and rapid expansion over the 9mm. If the .357sig is your cup of tea, more power to ya. I prefer .40S&W personally.
The .40S&W was created in 1990. The .357sig was created in 1994. The .357 Magnum was created in 1934 and it has better ballistics than the .357sig.
If you've ever read any of Dr. Fackler, or any of the IWBA works it explains the widespread adoption of the .357 Magnum by law enforcement in the 1960s and 1970s. The hollow point didn't really get underway until this time period. Ammunition manufacturers did not start testing their hollow point designs until the early 1990s. Prior to that, they used water tanks.
A hollow point expands through hydraulic pressure. When a hollow point bullet begins penetrating tissue, the water in the tissue is being forced into the hollow point. Water does not compress, so the easiest escape route is through the sides of the bullet which causes the expansion. However, human tissue is not 100% water. Therefore, when ammunition manufacturers used water tanks to test their ammunition it was testing much better than it was working in the field.
Lower veloctiy calibers like the 9mm, .38spl, and .45acp were having expansion reliability problems in actual shootings(because human tissue is not 100% water) due to being designed around the water tank. However, the high veloctiy of the .357 Magnum impacted the tissue with enough kinetic energy to allow for reliable expansion of these early hollow point designs in human tissue.
So what was confused as "energy dump", or "knockdown power" of the .357 Magnum was actually just a much more reliable cartridge for causing good expansion and penetration. With an expanded bullet, you get a wide waddcutter profile that crushes tissue much more effectively. However, with modern day ammo in which the design is refined around the ballistic gel test(much closer to actual tissue) expansion is much more reliable with the slower velocity calibers. However, as good as the .357 Magnum was, it did experience a number of failures to stop when shot placement was less than ideal. The same would apply to the .357sig should shot placement be off.
Using .357sig is another alternative in my opinion. I do like the fatter frontal area of the .357sig which probably helps with waddcutting and rapid expansion over the 9mm. If the .357sig is your cup of tea, more power to ya. I prefer .40S&W personally.
I understand the history of ammunition testing that you listed, but this still doesn't account for the 357SIG's sterling track-record compared to the .40 and the 9mm since the time of the 357SIG's adoption.
I understand the history of ammunition testing that you listed, but this still doesn't account for the 357SIG's sterling track-record compared to the .40 and the 9mm since the time of the 357SIG's adoption.
Can you cite some sources of this "sterling" track record? The .357 Magnum, which is more powerful and effective than the .357sig has as mixed of a track record as the other calibers do. Unfortunately, the internet is full of myth and outright BS. I hope you aren't going on one-shot-stop statistics. I hope that you have read this:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
How about this:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm
The US Border Patrol used the 155gr .40 for many years. It has similar energy to the .357sig, but makes a larger hole. BP switched to the 180gr load in December 2009 after "poor stopping effects and poor penetration through vehicle materials" with the 155gr loading. This was told to me directly at FLETC, Glynco by a supervisory firearms trainer working for BP along the Organ Pipe(Mexico border) which is involved in a LOT of counter smuggling and experience a lot of shootings.
US Federal Air Marshalls adopted the .357sig not for terminal effects, but for reliability. If cabin pressure is compromised at 30,000ft, the lack of oxygen makes for reduced burn of the cartridge propellants. During testing, FAM determined that the .357sig retained much more velocity in this environment than the 9mm or .40 and thus was a better choice for their intended mission. It is possible that the US Secret Service followed the FAM's lead on this given the many hours of the President's time on Airforce One.
If you're happy with the .357sig, great. However, always do yourself justice and re-analyse your choice every now and then with some good reading.
Can you cite some sources of this "sterling" track record? The .357 Magnum, which is more powerful and effective than the .357sig has as mixed of a track record as the other calibers do. Unfortunately, the internet is full of myth and outright BS. I hope you aren't going on one-shot-stop statistics. I hope that you have read this:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
How about this:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm
The US Border Patrol used the 155gr .40 for many years. It has similar energy to the .357sig, but makes a larger hole. BP switched to the 180gr load in December 2009 after "poor stopping effects and poor penetration through vehicle materials" with the 155gr loading. This was told to me directly at FLETC, Glynco by a supervisory firearms trainer working for BP along the Organ Pipe(Mexico border) which is involved in a LOT of counter smuggling and experience a lot of shootings.
US Federal Air Marshalls adopted the .357sig not for terminal effects, but for reliability. If cabin pressure is compromised at 30,000ft, the lack of oxygen makes for reduced burn of the cartridge propellants. During testing, FAM determined that the .357sig retained much more velocity in this environment than the 9mm or .40 and thus was a better choice for their intended mission. It is possible that the US Secret Service followed the FAM's lead on this given the many hours of the President's time on Airforce One.
If you're happy with the .357sig, great. However, always do yourself justice and re-analyse your choice every now and then with some good reading.
You have shown me numerous cases of other rounds failing, not the 357SIG though. NO cases of drastic "failure" have been reported that I am aware of. That is what I am going off of--absence of information.
This is what I mean, the 357SIG doesn't have any info on it that is bad. Other rounds do, even the .40, even though they were introduced at similar times. Modern 9mm and .45ACP loads as well. The .357 Magnum fell out of vogue before Gold-Dots and bonded ammo was issued in this caliber, so referencing it and comparing it to the 357SIG means we would have to instead compare it to other calibers of its time, against which it did well, in comparison. Much like the 357SIG seems to be doing again, recently.
TX DPS dumped the .45 almost 15 years ago and went to the 357SIG. Stayed with it, so it must be working, since they are paying a premium for the ammo and the guns have (supposedly, although I don't think it matters past 100K rounds that a P229 in 357SIG will last with even half-ass maintenance) a shorter service-life.
I simply have not heard of the 357SIG spectacularly failing. Have you? It's been out/issued broadly, and long enough, that you would think we would hear of an epic failure by now.
I have not considered OSS% anything but "interesting" because of the controversy surrounding it as well as discrepancies with it that I cannot account for.
You have shown me numerous cases of other rounds failing, not the 357SIG though. NO cases of drastic "failure" have been reported that I am aware of. That is what I am going off of--absence of information.
I simply have not heard of the 357SIG spectacularly failing. Have you? It's been out/issued broadly, and long enough, that you would think we would hear of an epic failure by now.
I am not going on M&S's data at all, but it has been fed into spread-sheets and correlates VERY well. A bit well to have been faked/skewed. Although I do agree that there are better ways to analyze effectiveness, hence I don't look at M&S's OSS data as anything but interesting.
How many officers does the TX DPS have?......less that 3,000? If you can't pull up some agency figures you are not getting anywhere with this. Unless you are a TX DPS officer, I doubt you will get this data unless you are part of another LE training division in Texas. I work for the DOI, and my brother is an officer with Austin PD. In his last refresher they reviewed a DPS OIS in El Paso in which officer Juan Gonzales shot a perp twice in his COM at approximately 7yrds in 2006. The perp ran about 100yrds into the dark and he was found several hours later after he bled out. I dont' keep up with APD's refreshers, but there's one case of the .357sig behaving just like a NORMAL service pistol caliber.
How many agencies use the .357sig, how many officers to they have, and how many shootings are they part of? Out of over 70,000 Federal officers around the country, only about 5,000 of those use .357sig which is about the combined FAM and USSS officer corps. The rest of those 65k officers use mostly 9mm or .40S&W. Naturally, if there are failures with the agency's equipment, you are FAR more likely to hear about it given the number of 9mms and .40s in service than you are with the .357sig which only compromises 7% of the officer corps. Also, shootings are not evenly distributed between the agencies. DEA and ATF compromise over 30% of all shootings in Federal service, and they have a combined officer corps of about 15,000 officers. I don't have exact figures, but with ATF, DOI, ICE, BP, CBP, and several other agencies going through FLETC I can personally vouche that about 75% of those officers are using .40 in the field.
I dont' think that you actually read the Firearms Tactical information.
How many officers does the TX DPS have?......less that 3,000? If you can't pull up some agency figures you are not getting anywhere with this. Unless you are a TX DPS officer, I doubt you will get this data unless you are part of another LE training division in Texas. I work for the DOI, and my brother is an officer with Austin PD. In his last refresher they reviewed a DPS OIS in El Paso in which officer Juan Gonzales shot a perp twice in his COM at approximately 7yrds in 2006. The perp ran about 100yrds into the dark and he was found several hours later after he bled out. I dont' keep up with APD's refreshers, but there's one case of the .357sig behaving just like a NORMAL service pistol caliber.
How many agencies use the .357sig, how many officers to they have, and how many shootings are they part of? Out of over 70,000 Federal officers around the country, only about 5,000 of those use .357sig which is about the combined FAM and USSS officer corps. The rest of those 65k officers use mostly 9mm or .40S&W. Naturally, if there are failures with the agency's equipment, you are FAR more likely to hear about it given the number of 9mms and .40s in service than you are with the .357sig which only compromises 7% of the officer corps. Also, shootings are not evenly distributed between the agencies. DEA and ATF compromise over 30% of all shootings in Federal service, and they have a combined officer corps of about 15,000 officers. I don't have exact figures, but with ATF, DOI, ICE, BP, CBP, and several other agencies going through FLETC I can personally vouche that about 75% of those officers are using .40 in the field.
I dont' think that you actually read the Firearms Tactical information.
The information has been around a very long time. I did not just go read it, but I have read it in the past. The gist of it is that penetration and expansion are all that matter, or at least, that is what I got from it.
No, I am not LE, so I don't have near the access to information that people who are do. However, someone shot 2 times COM and dying is pretty "effective" for a handgun round, considering that the COM shots very well could have both hit only 1 lung or something. I agree though, nothing to write home about. However, deer have also ran 100 yards after similar shots with high-powered rifles. I still remember that one incident posted/reported where a dozen .40 rounds hit a perp in the torso and he kept fighting. At least in this case the channel was changed.
The .357 Magnum, which is more powerful and effective than the .357sig has as mixed of a track record as the other calibers do.
Given the level and depth of knowledge you've clearly demonstrated in other threads, it surprises me that you think you can blindly compare these two cartridges. The complaints about the Magnum, and its failures, were related to explosive expansion and shallow wound tracks. The 357 SIG is known for neither of those problems.
I hope you aren't going on one-shot-stop statistics.
You're the one who brought up M&S and the OSS stuff. No one here has used that as an argument for 357 SIG.
BP switched to the 180gr load in December 2009 after "poor stopping effects and poor penetration through vehicle materials" with the 155gr loading. This was told to me directly at FLETC, Glynco by a supervisory firearms trainer working for BP along the Organ Pipe(Mexico border) which is involved in a LOT of counter smuggling and experience a lot of shootings.
That is the first time I've heard anyone within DHS have anything bad to say about the 155gr loadings that INS (then ICE & CBP) have been using for many years. They've had countless successful shootings with the round performing spectacularly. The people I've spoken with -- including some who were involved in the actual procurement for the new round -- seem to think that the primary motivation was the massive recoil of the 155gr loads which were impacting qualification rates, and the recoil impulse which was tearing up SIGs and HKs at a very accelerated rate.
(in fairness, however, the official announcement that went out to CBP offices did state that the 180gr round did better in certain testing, including auto glass and steel penetration)
US Federal Air Marshalls adopted the .357sig not for terminal effects, but for reliability.
That's absolutely untrue. The FAM Service switched to the 357 pre-9/11 when there were less than 50 guys, and they switched because USSS switched. When 9/11 happened and the agency had to increase by orders of magnitude, there was no time for additional testing or selection of a new weapon so FAA (this is pre-DHS) simply placed a sole source order under a critical exception to the normal Federal Acquisition Regulations.
It is possible that the US Secret Service followed the FAM's lead on this given the many hours of the President's time on Airforce One.
The USSS adopted 357 SIG before the FAMS. USSS has a long history of being very happy with high-velocity 9mm bullets but was unhappy with the durability of its SIG P228s when constantly punished by 115gr +p+ ammo. The 357 SIG was created in no small part as a response to this requirement.
How many officers does the TX DPS have?......less that 3,000? If you can't pull up some agency figures you are not getting anywhere with this. Unless you are a TX DPS officer, I doubt you will get this data unless you are part of another LE training division in Texas.
I worked at SIG when TX DPS switched. They were extremely happy with the terminal performance they were getting out of the 357s. Prior to adoption of the 357, DPS personnel could choose between SIG 9mm and SIG .45 pistols. Not only were the new 357s turning in better results (specifically, fewer shots per "stop") than the 9mm, but better than the .45, as well.
How many agencies use the .357sig, how many officers to they have, and how many shootings are they part of? Out of over 70,000 Federal officers around the country, only about 5,000 of those use .357sig which is about the combined FAM and USSS officer corps.
More agencies than that use it, and the numbers you gave for the combined USSS/FAM strength are also inaccurately low.
It's also the cartridge of choice for many state police agencies specifically because of its demonstrated performance in car-related shootings.
To the OP: what he says here:
...get a large bore magnum revolver for wood carry like a 4 inch 629 mountain gun in 44mag.
All the state troopers that I bullshit with hate it, would rather have either a 9 or a .45
Why do they hate it and what do they believe that a 9mm or .45 would do that the .357 SIG won't?
It's also the cartridge of choice for many state police agencies specifically because of its demonstrated performance in car-related shootings.
NC Highway Patrol is high on it because of this. Maybe JFreuler will chime in...
I can give an instance of a shooting involving TXDPS, but I do not know the Trooper's or the perp's name.
It was in far west Texas in 2007, several of the small county sheriffs deputies and TXDPS were pursuing a particularly violent individual. He was trying to get to New Mexico thinking the pursuit would be called off. When the state line was crossed, the TXDPS Troopers continued on(the deputies pulled back because in these remote counties, there just arent many LEOs), and New Mexico Troopers were up ahead. The guy stopped his car, and when a TXDPS Trooper approached, the guy tried to run him over. TXDPS Troopers fired on him, hitting him 6 times in the chest. The guy fought the Troopers, and fought all the way to the hospital in Lubbock. He stood trial for various crimes in early 2009, and got a lengthy prison sentence.
As for TXDPS, yes, they issued P220s in .45acp. I didnt know about the 9mm, and have never met a TXDPS Trooper with a 9mm. One of the issues with the .45acp was its lackluster performance against the various kinds of autobodies and glass. When testing on new rounds came out, one suggestion was switching their .45acp carry load instead adopting a new caliber altogether. In the end, they chose both. Many Texas Rangers still carry .45s in the form of the 1911 and the P220. In fact, the last time I was at Dallas County Sheriffs Office's sallyport, I saw 2 Texas Rangers escoting a prisoner in, one with a black as night 1911 and the other with a P220 with concho grips.
Dallas PD authorized the .357sig a while back(back in the days of the 150gr Federal HydraShok). Issue is still 9mm. However, just a couple of years back, DPD switched from the 125gr Speer GDHP to the new "Treasury Load", as a friend calls it. Its the 125gr Winchester Ranger Talon. It doesnt have the performance against autobdies and glass that the GDHP had. As such, it doesnt have the "love" that the Speer load had. In fact, many officers tried to keep their GDHPs in their pistols, some kept until within the last year! Once my friend, who has always been a .357mag/357sig junkie, lost his GDHPs he went back to his old P228TT.
WS6--As you can now see, while you may not be aware of them, there are 357Sig "failures" just like with any other duty handgun caliber. They are all just service pistols--not rifles or magic incapacitating phasers. If you like .357 Sig, feel free to use it. Personally, I have no need for 357 Sig or 45GAP, but if I got issued 357 Sig ammo, I wouldn't have any issues carrying it, as it works just as well as the 9 mm I am currently using. If I have to purchase my own ammo, then 9 mm or .40 S&W makes more sense.
As I have written previously:
"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."
My dad emptied a clip from his M1 into a south-bound North Korean one dark night, to little immediate effect.
Pat Rogers relayed to me a bad day in Viet Nam when he double tapped, three times in a row, an NVA mortarman who was shooting at him with a burp gun, this would be using an M14.
Even big bullets fail, it's to be expected.
I know guys down in Oklahoma who carry and swear by the .357Sig, one reason is that it shoots rather flat for a pistol round, and a few who find it to be more intrinsically accurate than the .40.
I have a video from a friend showing first round hits on a reduced IPSC steel target, from a G33, range is 200 yards.
Personally, I don't think it's a bad round, I just don't have any real use for it considering I'm issued 124gr +P Gold Dot for my Glock 9mms, and have the choice to carry 124gr +P and 127gr +P+ Ranger-T if I want to buy it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.