.357 SIG vs. 40 cal
- Thread starter giles
- Start date
- Status
cratz2
Member
I don't dislike the 357 SIG for any reason at all... have nothing against it whatsoever. Having said that, a much stronger case can be made against it than for it.
Cons: A given gun will hold fewer rounds than will the 9mm.
You might possibly end up with a 357 SIG round in a .40 barrel (not a big deal but I sure wouldn't want to be part of it happening the other way around.)
Dramatically more expensive than 9mm for practice loads.
Greatly reduced 'on shelf' selection compared to 9mm, .40S&W or 45ACP.
Snappier/more muzzle flip than any other cartridge I've ever shot considering weight of gun.
Pros: You get 100-200 fps over stronger 9mm loads. That's it!
If one wishes to make a case for a round with a larger than .35 caliber hole, then I can follow that. I just can't see that the 200 fps advantage of a 357 Magnum or a 357 SIG will provide a stunningly more effective advantage over a +P 9mm. And I don't see the 357SIG for a practical option for a civilian defensive handgun... If you don't shoot much and you come across a good deal on one, then sure... Or if you have a 40S&W and want the ability to fire different rounds. But not as a one gun answer.
At least not for me.
Cons: A given gun will hold fewer rounds than will the 9mm.
You might possibly end up with a 357 SIG round in a .40 barrel (not a big deal but I sure wouldn't want to be part of it happening the other way around.)
Dramatically more expensive than 9mm for practice loads.
Greatly reduced 'on shelf' selection compared to 9mm, .40S&W or 45ACP.
Snappier/more muzzle flip than any other cartridge I've ever shot considering weight of gun.
Pros: You get 100-200 fps over stronger 9mm loads. That's it!
If one wishes to make a case for a round with a larger than .35 caliber hole, then I can follow that. I just can't see that the 200 fps advantage of a 357 Magnum or a 357 SIG will provide a stunningly more effective advantage over a +P 9mm. And I don't see the 357SIG for a practical option for a civilian defensive handgun... If you don't shoot much and you come across a good deal on one, then sure... Or if you have a 40S&W and want the ability to fire different rounds. But not as a one gun answer.
At least not for me.
Sean Smith
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 4,925
Having owned both previously (and neither now ), my take on it is that the anti-.357 Sig folks are rather overstating their case.
Extra recoil? Seemed about the same to me going from a .40 to a .357 Sig barrel in the Glock 35 I had. The Sig is louder and has more of a "blast," but not by much. Both calibers are loud and snappy, and either one will leave your ears ringing if fired indoors.
Observation: .40 S&W practice ammo is almost all mild 180gr subsonic loads, while .357 Sig practice ammo is loaded up to at or near the same ballistics as the premium self-defense loads. Full-power 165gr .40 S&W loads are no nicer to shoot than full power 125gr .357 Sig loads, at least for me.
More muzzle flash? No. Muzzle flash is dictated by the specific load, with premium self-defense loads in either caliber having flash suppressants to reduce muzzle flash. Out of similar barrel lengths with comparable quality ammo the brightness of the muzzle flash was not much either way.
Comparing the hottest stuff in each caliber that you can actually get off the shelf (all courtesy of Cor-Bon's published figures):
9x19 125gr +P: 1,250 ft/sec, 434 ft-lbs
.40 S&W 150gr: 1,200 ft/sec, 480 ft-lbs (+10%)
.45 ACP 200gr +P: 1,050 ft/sec, 490 ft-lbs (+13%)
.357Sig 125gr: 1,425 ft/sec, 546 ft-lbs (+26%)
For those more interested in ballistic gelatin tests, if you compare the .357 Sig to the 9x19 test results at Ammolab.com, you will see that total or near-total (<.40") failures to expand when shot through 4 layers of denim were far less common with .357 Sig than they were with 9x19 (8/49 in 9mm Section 1 vs. 2/36 for .357 Sig Section 1).
http://www.ammolab.com/357_sig_1.htm
http://www.ammolab.com/9mm_section1.htm
Citing the performance of gee-whiz LEO only +P+ stuff in 9x19 to prove parity with .357 Sig is a bit of a stretch, considering how hard it can be to buy the stuff at all.
That said, I personally prefer 9x19, .45 ACP and 10mm Auto to either .40 S&W or .357 Sig.
), my take on it is that the anti-.357 Sig folks are rather overstating their case.Extra recoil? Seemed about the same to me going from a .40 to a .357 Sig barrel in the Glock 35 I had. The Sig is louder and has more of a "blast," but not by much. Both calibers are loud and snappy, and either one will leave your ears ringing if fired indoors.
Observation: .40 S&W practice ammo is almost all mild 180gr subsonic loads, while .357 Sig practice ammo is loaded up to at or near the same ballistics as the premium self-defense loads. Full-power 165gr .40 S&W loads are no nicer to shoot than full power 125gr .357 Sig loads, at least for me.
More muzzle flash? No. Muzzle flash is dictated by the specific load, with premium self-defense loads in either caliber having flash suppressants to reduce muzzle flash. Out of similar barrel lengths with comparable quality ammo the brightness of the muzzle flash was not much either way.
Comparing the hottest stuff in each caliber that you can actually get off the shelf (all courtesy of Cor-Bon's published figures):
9x19 125gr +P: 1,250 ft/sec, 434 ft-lbs
.40 S&W 150gr: 1,200 ft/sec, 480 ft-lbs (+10%)
.45 ACP 200gr +P: 1,050 ft/sec, 490 ft-lbs (+13%)
.357Sig 125gr: 1,425 ft/sec, 546 ft-lbs (+26%)
For those more interested in ballistic gelatin tests, if you compare the .357 Sig to the 9x19 test results at Ammolab.com, you will see that total or near-total (<.40") failures to expand when shot through 4 layers of denim were far less common with .357 Sig than they were with 9x19 (8/49 in 9mm Section 1 vs. 2/36 for .357 Sig Section 1).
http://www.ammolab.com/357_sig_1.htm
http://www.ammolab.com/9mm_section1.htm
Citing the performance of gee-whiz LEO only +P+ stuff in 9x19 to prove parity with .357 Sig is a bit of a stretch, considering how hard it can be to buy the stuff at all.
That said, I personally prefer 9x19, .45 ACP and 10mm Auto to either .40 S&W or .357 Sig.
The 357 sig is more accurate in general. The 40sw is more readily available. The both kick about the same if full power 155 and 165 grain 40's are compared to full power 125 grain 357 sigs. 180 grain 40's kick a tad less than the 357 sig. I am getting to the point I prefer a 9mm with +p+ ammo to either.
Pat
Pat
FireInTheHole
Member
Bah, I can beat corbon 135gr by 200fps using 12gr of longshot and a nosler 135gr in my g22. (Averaged 1482fps out of my 4.5" barrel)
Now if they would just sell a gold dot (or ANY premium manstopper) in 135gr! (I have often thought of pulling some powRball bullets and reloading with longshot...)
Has anybody performed penetration tests with nosler 135gr in .40 or 10mm???
J.M.
Member
I'm not sure that either would be my choice for a defensive auto...both rounds feel more like service rounds to me. More at home in large frame steel guns.
For defensive autos I think that I'd be looking more to 9mm or .45 auto. They just feel more at home in smaller guns to me.
But that wasn't your question...I won't rehash everything that everybody else has said, but one thing went unmentioned. .357 sig being a bottle-necked round is about as jam proof as a round can get. All that little bullet has to do if fall into the huge opening at the rear of the chamber and it's golden. The reloader also has more choices as to bullet design...the hugest hollow points imagionable will feed without a hitch. The down side to the reloader is that it is a bottle-necked round, and straight walled cartiridges are less of a pain to deal with.
Having said all that .357 sig is the modern armor penatrator that the .38 super was designed to be.
Nice round that .38 super..... But that isn't what you asked either. - JM.
For defensive autos I think that I'd be looking more to 9mm or .45 auto. They just feel more at home in smaller guns to me.
But that wasn't your question...I won't rehash everything that everybody else has said, but one thing went unmentioned. .357 sig being a bottle-necked round is about as jam proof as a round can get. All that little bullet has to do if fall into the huge opening at the rear of the chamber and it's golden. The reloader also has more choices as to bullet design...the hugest hollow points imagionable will feed without a hitch. The down side to the reloader is that it is a bottle-necked round, and straight walled cartiridges are less of a pain to deal with.
Having said all that .357 sig is the modern armor penatrator that the .38 super was designed to be.
Nice round that .38 super..... But that isn't what you asked either. - JM.
I won't rehash everything that everybody else has said, but one thing went unmentioned. .357 sig being a bottle-necked round is about as jam proof as a round can get.
END
Thats the theory but its not reality. The bottle neck design is difficult to feed. In my Glock 33 it was prone to nose dive feeding malfunctions. The same was true of a BHP I had converted from 40sw to 357 sig. Many of your Glocks need FML mags to feed 357 sig. There is no such problem with the 9mm. There are many very reliable 357 sig guns but the 9mm with its tapered case seems to have the edge in real guns.
Pat
END
Thats the theory but its not reality. The bottle neck design is difficult to feed. In my Glock 33 it was prone to nose dive feeding malfunctions. The same was true of a BHP I had converted from 40sw to 357 sig. Many of your Glocks need FML mags to feed 357 sig. There is no such problem with the 9mm. There are many very reliable 357 sig guns but the 9mm with its tapered case seems to have the edge in real guns.
Pat
A
AnklePocket
Guest
When you cut through it all: .357 Sig = Pure Shooting Joy. This makes the arguement irrelevent.
Disclaimer:
I'm a hasbeen and occassionally enter "wanna-be" status (,but never "could've-been" because I really was).
Disclaimer:
I'm a hasbeen and occassionally enter "wanna-be" status (,but never "could've-been" because I really was).
cratz2
Member
As far as feeding smoothly rankings go, 10s really seem to feed the most smoothly to me. Not just in Glocks but in most any medium to full sized pistols. I don't know if anyone's done much research into it or not and I guess it's really pretty silly considering how many rounds of 9mm have been fed through Glocks, Berettas and SIGs but if I was a bettin' man (which I'm not) I'd put my money on 10mms feeding the smoothest and most consistantly.
Actually the 10mm is a difficult round to designe a gun to feed. The FBI wanted 10mm in its HRT pistols. But all the custom smiths told them it could not be done and meet the FBI reliability requirments. The 10mm is a long cartridge with no taper. Most of the bullets are truncated cone shaped. I found my Glock 21 far more tolerant for feeding lots of different handloads than my Glock 20 was. Their are reliable 10mm's but thats a testimate to the gun designes not the cartridges feed reliability.
Pat
Pat
As for overall reliability. I do have some test results of semi auto pistol testing done by the Department of Justice. They did not test the 10mm. But they found that nearly all the 9mm's and 45's pased their requirments while about 40% of the 40sw and 357 sig guns did. The results are a bit dated as they are from 1999.
Pat
Pat
cratz2
Member
I was thinking more of guns that were designed with the 10mm in mind or those that underwent actual physical changes to incorporate the 10mm round such as the Smiths and Glocks more than the 1911s.
Though I'm sure Sean will tell us that some 10mm 1911s run just fine.
Though I'm sure Sean will tell us that some 10mm 1911s run just fine.
ProCharger
Member
anyone have anything similar to what jnb01 posted in comparison of a .40 S&W and 9mm? just curious and thought i would spare starting a new thread.
ProCharger
Member
Just found it a minute ago.....thanks.
Sean Smith
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 4,925
Well, I've always found it odd that some folks say 10mm is a poor feeder because of its OAL, when it has exactly the same OAL as .45 ACP.
In a 1911, 10mm will be a better feeder than .40 S&W because it is closer to the OAL of .45 ACP. Guys with game guns in .40 S&W often handload it to near-10mm OAL for just that reason.
J.M.
Member
Sigfan,
I'm not one to bicker about such things, but are you sure that malfunctions that you discribe weren't magizine issues?
What I was pointing out was that from a reloaders standpoint, we finally have an auto round that doesn't rely on bullet profile for feeding dependability.
But if you've had guns that had feeding issues with this round, there might be reason for consern...of course I can't think of a single round that I haven't seen have problems in at least one gun or anougher. - JM.
I'm not one to bicker about such things, but are you sure that malfunctions that you discribe weren't magizine issues?
What I was pointing out was that from a reloaders standpoint, we finally have an auto round that doesn't rely on bullet profile for feeding dependability.
But if you've had guns that had feeding issues with this round, there might be reason for consern...of course I can't think of a single round that I haven't seen have problems in at least one gun or anougher. - JM.
JM no problem. Not trying to bicker either. However from what I have read and from what I have experienced. The 10mm is not a very feed reliably cartridge. The FBI had to go with 45 acp because the smiths said they coudl not make a 10mm reliable enough. My 20 was finicky with certain bullet profiles. The 10mm is tall and abrupt in shape its not an ideal shaped round for feeding. If it had a tapered case like the 9mm it may have been a different story.
Pat
Pat
I bought one of the first Sig P229's (.40) when they were intoduced and have put many hundreds of rounds through it over the years with the ONLY malfuntions EVER were when my 12 year old son shot it a little limp wristed. I have since bought the .357 barrel from Sig and didn't see a huge difference either way. It is a little sharper in recoil over the .40 but just as accurate as always. The .40 ammo is cheaper but the .357 seems a little hotter. Not a big enough difference to me to make a clear choice. I probably won't ever sell it but today prefer a compact 1911 series .45 like my LW Stealth SDS.
I got rid of my 33 due to nose dive feeding malfunctions.
Pat
------------------------
Hmm! Good to know. Totally different experience than me and my model 33. Could you attribute the jams to any particular ammo? I guess not since you got rid of it.
I'm really only familiar with my own Glock 33 which has been 100%. But I've seen many many 9mm Glocks in action in NY on my job and the NYCPD job, and I've seen them jam many times (mostly the 19, but the 26 too). They always have some excuse like "limp wristing". I NEVER want to hear that limp wristing excuse for ANY gun because who the hell knows how you are going to be able to hold a gun in an emergency situation.
Pat
------------------------
Hmm! Good to know. Totally different experience than me and my model 33. Could you attribute the jams to any particular ammo? I guess not since you got rid of it.
I'm really only familiar with my own Glock 33 which has been 100%. But I've seen many many 9mm Glocks in action in NY on my job and the NYCPD job, and I've seen them jam many times (mostly the 19, but the 26 too). They always have some excuse like "limp wristing". I NEVER want to hear that limp wristing excuse for ANY gun because who the hell knows how you are going to be able to hold a gun in an emergency situation.
- Status
