I prefer a small .357 myself but wouldn't argue that many warmer loads from a compact 9mm aren't roughly equal to many loads from a snub .357 in velocity and power, at least within the 110, 115, 125 grain weight parameters. A year or so ago I read an article by Evan Marshall making this same case, comparing a Kahr MK9 and a Smith and Wesson 640. This only proves that there is considerable overlap among various calibers and their platforms. No surprise. I still prefer the versatility of the .357 with its greater variety and range of loads that it can successfully chamber and fire. And, as has been stated, one can chamber and fire loads from the .357 that would leave the 9mm in the dust. I wouldn't quibble over the size difference. .355 versus .357 seems nothing to argue over. Still, the original poster did seem to be trolling.
.357 Mag: Performance loss with barrels under 4" ?
- Thread starter Para Bellum
- Start date
AttackTurtle
New member
Troll
I wish I noticed that before I wasted my time responding!
Para Bellum, you Troll. Your not insterested in obtaining a 357 at all
I wish I noticed that before I wasted my time responding!
Para Bellum, you Troll. Your not insterested in obtaining a 357 at all
Para Bellum
New member
did I take a toy away?
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=165715
1. I asked a question in my starting post.
2. "gb_in_ga" answered it and linked me to an article in the 3rd post.
3. I thanked him in the 4th post and the thing was over for me.
4. Then I posted my conclusion in another thread in the general handgun forum.
5. So please, what is your problem?
PS: And just in case anyone thinks my nickname showed a preference for a certain caliber - learn some latin
I do beg your pardon?
Sorry, there are 124gr 9x19mm Federal EMFJ:
it really is a 124gr EMFJ 9x19mm (see pic above). And according to said article it leaves the Glock 26 at 381m/s = 1.250 ft/sec. Thats slighty faster i.e. the same than the bullet mentioned in the quote.
yes and no. The result from this thread made me post the other one wich I started with the statement: "We have figured out the following in another thread. I thought, some might be interested (and wishing to comment):"
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=165715
Why do you feel attacked?
I am looking for a reasonable small gun. And I think I have found out in the first quarter of this thread that there actually is no advantage to short barreled .357 Magnums (as opposed to 4" and longer ones). Why is that a problem to some of us?
you mean the big difference between 0.355 and 0.357 inches? Oh yeah, that totally chances everything, doesn't it?
Thank you for your reason and thought.
I still can't understand all the hostility in this thread. So, anyone who critizezes me:
1. I asked a question in my starting post.
2. "gb_in_ga" answered it and linked me to an article in the 3rd post.
3. I thanked him in the 4th post and the thing was over for me.
4. Then I posted my conclusion in another thread in the general handgun forum.
5. So please, what is your problem?
PS: And just in case anyone thinks my nickname showed a preference for a certain caliber - learn some latin
22-rimfire
New member
I have to admit this was fun. Did I learn anything? Maybe, but not much. Did it change my mind on the .357? No Frankly, I am not really a fan of the 357 flame thrower in short barreled revolvers. I shoot 38+P in mine for home defense purposes or plinking. I shoot a 41 mag or larger for more serious concerns. And, yes I do like 22's a lot and I feel perfectly safe using one for defensive pursuits. I would go with a 40S&W anytime over the 9mm. The 40S&W does it better all the way around.
No pardon offered Para Bellum. Because what you quoted from my comment was right on the mark. The rest, I could argue about.
So, where in Europa do you live? What are the gun laws like? I suspect we have a pretty good thing going over here in the US. We just have to not let anyone mess it up. Enjoy!
No pardon offered Para Bellum. Because what you quoted from my comment was right on the mark. The rest, I could argue about.
So, where in Europa do you live? What are the gun laws like? I suspect we have a pretty good thing going over here in the US. We just have to not let anyone mess it up. Enjoy!
Para Bellum - you quoted me saying, "Quote:
Still, the original poster did seem to be trolling" and then followed with,
"I still can't understand all the hostility in this thread. So, anyone who critizezes me..." Actually, I meant no hostility, just a vague and general comment that you seemed to have your mind made up before posting and seemed to be "fishing" (if not trolling) for responses. Further reflection indicates you might have been doing that just to hear some other points of view than your own (which is a good thing). At any rate, I meant no hostility in suggesting you were trolling. Enjoy your Glock 26, a fine pistol. I just kinda like round guns in spite of all their many limitations.
Still, the original poster did seem to be trolling" and then followed with,
"I still can't understand all the hostility in this thread. So, anyone who critizezes me..." Actually, I meant no hostility, just a vague and general comment that you seemed to have your mind made up before posting and seemed to be "fishing" (if not trolling) for responses. Further reflection indicates you might have been doing that just to hear some other points of view than your own (which is a good thing). At any rate, I meant no hostility in suggesting you were trolling. Enjoy your Glock 26, a fine pistol. I just kinda like round guns in spite of all their many limitations.
seeker_two
New member
In pistol length barrels, the change in velocity per 1" change in barrel length is somewhere in the range of 30-50 fps, depending on the caliber and particular powder being used.
I chronographed Winchester's .357 mag 145 gr. Silvertip load at about 1290 fps from a 4" barrel (536 fpe) and at about 1241 fps from a 2.5" S&W Model 66 (496 fpe). That's about what one might expect to lose when going from a 4" to a 2.5" in the .357 caliber... not much at all. Personally, the 125 gr .357 loads are not my load of choice... I much prefer the heavier weight bullets... 145 gr. to 158 gr. in .357.
Comparing this to 9mm is pointless to anyone seasoned in defense handgunning. The difference in velocity means very little, it's who is doing the shooting that matters most! I feel moderately well armed with a top grade 9mm semi-auto and top pistols in this caliber tend to run fairly reliably. But I feel even more confident with this in my hand:
Of course, it takes a more skilled shooter to hit well firing a revolver double action... and some folks just don't have what it takes to do that well.
BTW, the "fastest" bullet doesn't win anything but a speed contest, which doesn't amount to squat. Bullets are designed to perform optimally within certain velocity "windows", push a JHP too fast and all you'll get is overexpansion or disintegration and insufficient penetration. Many would argue, and rightfully so, that for defense use, a 158 gr. lead SWC moving at 1000 fps is preferrable to a 124 gr. JHP moving at 1300 fps. I would prefer good penetration with the hope of some expansion over good expansion with the hope of some penetration. And I'd much prefer a 158 gr. Gold Dot moving at 1175 fps from a 2.5" barrel to a 124 gr. 9mm moving at 1300 fps. Although in the right hands, either would be likely to get the job done reasonably well.
I chronographed Winchester's .357 mag 145 gr. Silvertip load at about 1290 fps from a 4" barrel (536 fpe) and at about 1241 fps from a 2.5" S&W Model 66 (496 fpe). That's about what one might expect to lose when going from a 4" to a 2.5" in the .357 caliber... not much at all. Personally, the 125 gr .357 loads are not my load of choice... I much prefer the heavier weight bullets... 145 gr. to 158 gr. in .357.
Comparing this to 9mm is pointless to anyone seasoned in defense handgunning. The difference in velocity means very little, it's who is doing the shooting that matters most! I feel moderately well armed with a top grade 9mm semi-auto and top pistols in this caliber tend to run fairly reliably. But I feel even more confident with this in my hand:
Of course, it takes a more skilled shooter to hit well firing a revolver double action... and some folks just don't have what it takes to do that well.
BTW, the "fastest" bullet doesn't win anything but a speed contest, which doesn't amount to squat. Bullets are designed to perform optimally within certain velocity "windows", push a JHP too fast and all you'll get is overexpansion or disintegration and insufficient penetration. Many would argue, and rightfully so, that for defense use, a 158 gr. lead SWC moving at 1000 fps is preferrable to a 124 gr. JHP moving at 1300 fps. I would prefer good penetration with the hope of some expansion over good expansion with the hope of some penetration. And I'd much prefer a 158 gr. Gold Dot moving at 1175 fps from a 2.5" barrel to a 124 gr. 9mm moving at 1300 fps. Although in the right hands, either would be likely to get the job done reasonably well.
Para Bellum
New member
allright.
I don't have a Glock 26 and won't get one. I have two Glock 19s (4" barrel) which are a bit bigger than the 26 but offer more power, better handling and magazine capacity. I will get a .357 though. When I bought my first handgun 10 yrs ago the choice was between a 4" S&W 686 or the Glock 19. If you have a gun in your mind for so long, you end up owning one some day.
The 686 felt too big for concealed carry and thats one of the reasons I went for the G19. So ever since then I try to find a .357 that suits my needs:
1. concealed carry,
2. good handling and an
3 advantage over the 9x19mm.
That's why I looked into the snubbies and finally found that they won't convince me. So I have to find a slim but nice-to handle 4" .357...
Master Blaster
New member
I have and carry a glock 26 regularly for the last 5 years. Its advantage is the short grip which makes it more concealable. As far as mag capacity goes, it carrys better with the 10 rounders, I can even pocket carry mine when deep cover is essential, you cant do that with a 19. The 26 will take 17 rounders, and even the g-18 33 rounders (with 2+ extensions) if you need to take on a horde of man eating zombies.
I tend to agreee with you on performance that the 9mm can equal commercial 125 gr .357 loads. 1250 fps 124 gr 9mm is just as good as 1250 fps 125 gr .357.
Most days I carry a j frame snubby S&W 642 its advantage is smaller size and lighter weight, it only holds 5 shots, .38 +p 135 gr at 850 fps. Even though its not the equalof the 9mm, it will still make a .36" hole and can pass completely through a human body. What more do you need. With good shot placement which is key its as effective as a .357 mag or a 9mm +p. Self defense happens from 3 to 10 feet away for civilians like me, so with practice I dont feel under armed with my .38 snubby.
Get a 686 its a great revolver 4 or 6" makes a good range and woods gun, but they are not a deep cover gun.
"Get a 686 its a great revolver 4 or 6" makes a good range and woods gun, but they are not a deep cover gun."
Yep. I've got a 4" one, and it is not all things for all people. Specifically, it has 1 real shortcoming, especially if you are in the South like I am -- and that is that it is heavy and bulky, so it really isn't a good choice (around here, at least) for CCW. But it is really good for just about anything else you'd care to do around here -- range, plinking, home defense, backwoods carry (with the right holster), even hunting (although a 6" would be better for that).
Yep. I've got a 4" one, and it is not all things for all people. Specifically, it has 1 real shortcoming, especially if you are in the South like I am -- and that is that it is heavy and bulky, so it really isn't a good choice (around here, at least) for CCW. But it is really good for just about anything else you'd care to do around here -- range, plinking, home defense, backwoods carry (with the right holster), even hunting (although a 6" would be better for that).
I did and still does appear to me and others here that you had a preconceived notion when you started this thread.
You cite an article in a magazine that I've never heard of and can't pull up because the link is broken.
It is readily apparent to most revolver shooters that the two are NOT the same when you compare the best defensive round for a 9mm to the best defensive round for the .357 so many of us here were somewhat annoyed by this odd way of looking at things to support what we saw as your belief.
Had I not seen the other thread wherein you say it has been concluded that the 9mm was a better round maybe I would have looked at thing differently but I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion to start the other thread.
'splain that to me and maybe I'll cut you some slack. until then I think you're trolling.
You cite an article in a magazine that I've never heard of and can't pull up because the link is broken.
It is readily apparent to most revolver shooters that the two are NOT the same when you compare the best defensive round for a 9mm to the best defensive round for the .357 so many of us here were somewhat annoyed by this odd way of looking at things to support what we saw as your belief.
Had I not seen the other thread wherein you say it has been concluded that the 9mm was a better round maybe I would have looked at thing differently but I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion to start the other thread.
'splain that to me and maybe I'll cut you some slack. until then I think you're trolling.
In doing a little more research you started the other thread just over 12 hours after starting this one. In those twelve hours you had 3 replies. the replies stated this.
And yet you came to a conclusion contrary to what was said here and stated so in the other thread with the implication that others here agreed with you.
Here is what you wrote to start the other thread. this is after reading the three quotes I cited above with nothing to support your claims!
And yet you came to a conclusion contrary to what was said here and stated so in the other thread with the implication that others here agreed with you.
Here is what you wrote to start the other thread. this is after reading the three quotes I cited above with nothing to support your claims!
The Body Bagger
New member
This is fact: 145gr (note weight) at 1241fps
But because of the posting by original poster this is the result:
This is what happens when people go out into the world armed with disinformation. If we lived in the world of faeries and wood nymphs then call me Alice, but since we don't how about we try to provide actual data instead of what we heard or what we think.
But because of the posting by original poster this is the result:
and also:
This is what happens when people go out into the world armed with disinformation. If we lived in the world of faeries and wood nymphs then call me Alice, but since we don't how about we try to provide actual data instead of what we heard or what we think.
Para Bellum
New member
Gonzo....sigh....
The Article in Deutsche Jagt Zeitung has three pages, you have to go forward using the links on the bottom. The EMFJ is described on page three. In case this was too complicated, here is the link to page three.
if you can't read this, here is an excerpt, with highlights that are clear in any language:
"Federal Expanding Full Metal Jacket 124 Grains
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Das EFMJ von Federal ist eine Geschossentwicklung, die ganz ohne Hohlspitze auskommt. Bei diesem Geschoss ist ein unter Druck stehender Gummieinsatz unter der Geschossspitze für die Deformation zuständig Ð und die Sache funktioniert tadellos.
Das EFMJ wurde für den Behördenmarkt entwickelt, und man wollte ein Deformationsgeschoss, das ohne Hohlspitze auskommt. Bei einem Polizeieinsatz in New York starben mehrere unbeteiligte, weil sich die verwendeten Federal Hydra Shoc Hohlspitzgeschosse 9mm Luger beim Durchdringen der Kleidung verstopft hatten und wie Vollmantelgeschosse durchschlugen. Das kann mit dem EFMJ nicht passieren. Die Federal Patrone ist eine +P Laborierung und erreicht aus dem Lauf der Glock 381 m/s. Damit ist sie die schnellste Patrone der 124 Grains Laborierungen und die energiereichste Patrone im Test. Erreicht wird das mit 5,0 Grains Blättchenpulver. Der Mündungsblitz ist sehr hell. Alle Waffen schossen mit der Federal Patrone störungsfrei.
Die Präzision war mit 22 Millimeter ausgezeichnet. Der Rückschlag fällt aus der leichten Glock heftig aus. Das Expanding Full Metal Jacket funktionierte im Gelatineblock wie im Lehrbuch. Es pilzte ohne Masseverlust bis auf 16,4 Millimeter auf, durchschlug den eingegossenen Knochen und blieb kurz vor Ende des Blockes stecken. Das Geschoss war so gut erhalten, dass sogar das „F“ auf der Geschoss-Spitze noch mitten im Geschosspilz lesbar war. Für Fangschusszwecke eine hervorragende Patrone, die zuverlässig funktioniert und gute Tiefenwirkung hat."
where did I say that "the 9mm was a better round" ?! If you keep on I have to seriosly doubt your reading abilities. I wrote the following:
"That's a clear result to me:
1. Bullet diameter and weight are the same and
2. subcompact 9x19mm semiauto pistols outperform short barreled .357 Mag. revolvers."
I hope you know the difference between a gun and a "round". Nobody doubts that the .357 Mag. has more potential than the 9x19mm cartridge. But it depends on the gun it is fired from (surprised?). Was this to complicated still? I'll try again: .357 good, short barrel not good for .357 Mag.
1. Glock 26 + Federal EMFJ 124gr = 1.250 ft/sec (381m/s).
2. Model 19, 2 1/2" barrel + Remington .357 Magnum 125-grain SJHP (Full-house load) = 1.243 ft/sec.
And, dear Sir, can you falsify these numbers?
whatever....
there you go again, the link works perfectly:
The Article in Deutsche Jagt Zeitung has three pages, you have to go forward using the links on the bottom. The EMFJ is described on page three. In case this was too complicated, here is the link to page three.
if you can't read this, here is an excerpt, with highlights that are clear in any language:
"Federal Expanding Full Metal Jacket 124 Grains
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Das EFMJ von Federal ist eine Geschossentwicklung, die ganz ohne Hohlspitze auskommt. Bei diesem Geschoss ist ein unter Druck stehender Gummieinsatz unter der Geschossspitze für die Deformation zuständig Ð und die Sache funktioniert tadellos.
Das EFMJ wurde für den Behördenmarkt entwickelt, und man wollte ein Deformationsgeschoss, das ohne Hohlspitze auskommt. Bei einem Polizeieinsatz in New York starben mehrere unbeteiligte, weil sich die verwendeten Federal Hydra Shoc Hohlspitzgeschosse 9mm Luger beim Durchdringen der Kleidung verstopft hatten und wie Vollmantelgeschosse durchschlugen. Das kann mit dem EFMJ nicht passieren. Die Federal Patrone ist eine +P Laborierung und erreicht aus dem Lauf der Glock 381 m/s. Damit ist sie die schnellste Patrone der 124 Grains Laborierungen und die energiereichste Patrone im Test. Erreicht wird das mit 5,0 Grains Blättchenpulver. Der Mündungsblitz ist sehr hell. Alle Waffen schossen mit der Federal Patrone störungsfrei.
Die Präzision war mit 22 Millimeter ausgezeichnet. Der Rückschlag fällt aus der leichten Glock heftig aus. Das Expanding Full Metal Jacket funktionierte im Gelatineblock wie im Lehrbuch. Es pilzte ohne Masseverlust bis auf 16,4 Millimeter auf, durchschlug den eingegossenen Knochen und blieb kurz vor Ende des Blockes stecken. Das Geschoss war so gut erhalten, dass sogar das „F“ auf der Geschoss-Spitze noch mitten im Geschosspilz lesbar war. Für Fangschusszwecke eine hervorragende Patrone, die zuverlässig funktioniert und gute Tiefenwirkung hat."
why bother, then?
where did I say that "the 9mm was a better round" ?! If you keep on I have to seriosly doubt your reading abilities. I wrote the following:
"That's a clear result to me:
1. Bullet diameter and weight are the same and
2. subcompact 9x19mm semiauto pistols outperform short barreled .357 Mag. revolvers."
I hope you know the difference between a gun and a "round". Nobody doubts that the .357 Mag. has more potential than the 9x19mm cartridge. But it depends on the gun it is fired from (surprised?). Was this to complicated still? I'll try again: .357 good, short barrel not good for .357 Mag.
I drew my conclusion from the information in the article cited above and the information from the article mentioned and linked in the second answer (that is the 3rd post, ok?) by gb_in_ga, i.e. http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38vs357snub.htm. Those facts from the cited articles are:
1. Glock 26 + Federal EMFJ 124gr = 1.250 ft/sec (381m/s).
2. Model 19, 2 1/2" barrel + Remington .357 Magnum 125-grain SJHP (Full-house load) = 1.243 ft/sec.
And, dear Sir, can you falsify these numbers?
you can't say I didn't try hard to explain it, can you?
PB I notice in your attempt to 'splain what you did and try to tell me my reading comprehension isn't what it should be you tippy toed around this right here.
Did you have a mouse in your pocket when you (plural) figured that out because as I noted, and you completely ignored, nobody but you drew that conclusion.
Perhaps you can't understand what they wrote and your reading comprehension needs some brushing up.
Be happy with your Glock, really, be happy with it, just don't ask me to bow to it because it might in some small way, if the circumstances align properly, be a better shooter.
Oh, by the way, Posting some german gibberish doesn't help your case. I'm not going to even try to translate some crap by some magazine I wouldn't buy or choose to read!
You say your drew your conclusion from this article posted but here is the last line from that web page.
Your conclusions are suspect, your attempt to spin the conversation to meet your version of the facts and opinions would make even the most seasoned of political hacks smile.
You can yip and yap, quote and misquote, sidestep, circumnavigate your own words and say "Whatever" to points you can’t answer but your dog don't hunt in this field!
Did you have a mouse in your pocket when you (plural) figured that out because as I noted, and you completely ignored, nobody but you drew that conclusion.
Perhaps you can't understand what they wrote and your reading comprehension needs some brushing up.
Be happy with your Glock, really, be happy with it, just don't ask me to bow to it because it might in some small way, if the circumstances align properly, be a better shooter.
Oh, by the way, Posting some german gibberish doesn't help your case. I'm not going to even try to translate some crap by some magazine I wouldn't buy or choose to read!
You say your drew your conclusion from this article posted but here is the last line from that web page.
Your conclusions are suspect, your attempt to spin the conversation to meet your version of the facts and opinions would make even the most seasoned of political hacks smile.
You can yip and yap, quote and misquote, sidestep, circumnavigate your own words and say "Whatever" to points you can’t answer but your dog don't hunt in this field!
Para Bellum
New member
I thought you might understand the highlighted parts: "Federal Expanding Full Metal Jacket 124 Grains ... Glock 381 m/s."
All it comes down to is:
Anyway. If I met you in the real world and we had the same discussion, this would be the moment to have a drink and stop talking...cheers.
Given equal bullet weight and barrel length, the 9mm won't even come close to a .357. And I don't have anything against the 9mm, have a Glock 17 and think it is a great pistol.
But for a pistol to possibly be carried while on my motorcycle or out in the woods fishing, I'll take a 5-shot .357 (seriously considering an SP101 for this use) over a 10, 15 or 17 round 9mm. The .357 will take heavier bullets, throw them faster and drive them deeper into something. 125gr is too light for .357 IMO. You really need something like the 145gr Silvertips or heavier to get the most out of the round. Let us not worry about recoil either, because with enough practice you CAN rapid fire even a .44 Magnum.
But for a pistol to possibly be carried while on my motorcycle or out in the woods fishing, I'll take a 5-shot .357 (seriously considering an SP101 for this use) over a 10, 15 or 17 round 9mm. The .357 will take heavier bullets, throw them faster and drive them deeper into something. 125gr is too light for .357 IMO. You really need something like the 145gr Silvertips or heavier to get the most out of the round. Let us not worry about recoil either, because with enough practice you CAN rapid fire even a .44 Magnum.