.357 sig vs every other handgun ammo

[TEX]

Years ago, about 1998 or so, I actually had a conversation with a Texas DPS officer who part of the group that convinced the DPS to go from the 45ACP to the 357SIG. What I got out of the conversation was that they wanted to go this direction for two reasons; the ability to penetrate car bodies better, and a quicker put down or stoppage of bad guys. It seems the rank and file felt that the 45 did the job when it hit a bad guy in a vital area, but did not seem to deliver as quick a stop as the old 357 Magnum revolver round. At the time, I believe they had settled on the Speer Gold Dot in 124 grain. Although not specifically mentioned by him, I would think the 356SIG round would be less prone to feeding problems than the 40 it is based on. I can certainly believe that the 357SIG would do better at penetrating car bodies, but I don't know about faster stops. The 357SIG, although compared to the older 357 Magnum, does not really approach the hotter 357 Magum loads - only the standard loads. I think the Texas DPS is still carrying the 357SIG. Personally, I think if the DPS wanted their old 357 Magnum back in an auto configuration, then the way to go would be a double-stack 1911 chambered in 9x23. This, or the 9x25 (10mm necked down to 9mm) would penetrate car bodies real well. I don't know if Corbon offers it yet, but the 357SIG in 115 grain DPX rounds moving as fast as possible would be pretty wicked.

TEX

 

[.357SIG]

Don't the Air Marshalls use a Glaser type of round? So the penetration of a normal round is largely irrelevant.

The Air Marshals use the 125 gr. Speer Gold Dot round...same as TX DPS.

 

[M1911]

There are far, far more important things that will effect the outcome of a gunfight than whether your handguns 9mm, .40, .45, 10mm, or .357Sig. If you miss your target, it won't matter whether you were carrying a .50 BMG. If you hit in the right place, the difference between 9mm, .40, etc., won't make a difference.

Personally, I find the muzzle flash and report of .357 Sig to be excessive. YMMV.

If we all spent 1/2 the time training that we do arguing about which is best, we'd be a lot better off.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

the .357 SIG was designed to replicate precisely one .357 magnum load, in an autoloader. If that one load does what you want, then it's a good choice, but that one load was chosen for effectiveness against human assailants. Handguns are useful for more than just that. The .357 SIG isn't.

Actually, I've used the .357 Sig effectively against a number of deer, racoons, ground hogs and other assorted varmints. I never shot a coyote or dog with it, but I trus that it would do the job here also. I also once had a stare down with a 1600 lb steer that was threatening to kill me as I loaded it onto a trailer. I dodn't have to shoot, but I was trusting the .357 Sig to penetrate the skull and put him down if I did.

So it depends on what you want your handguns to do. If all you're concerned about is self defense against human attackers, you've got at least 10 essentially equivalent choices. At least, the real-world differences are so small that decades of controversy and debate haven't produced a clear winner. Logic says that's because there isn't one.

Your logic is flawed. A decade of debate hasn't produced a clear winner because some of the experts choose to obfuscate the debate with flawed rhetoric rather than sound science. The .357 Sig isn't tremendously better than the 9mm or .40 S&W, but it does have some real and tangible advantages. Preference over the .357 Magnum and 44 Magnum is a matter of ergonomics and application.

Michael Courtney

 

[Dr. Courtney]

10mm beats it every way you can measure it

Except availability of quality autoloaders made by Sig arms.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Could you guys give me some conversation points on what the 40 or 45 does better than the 357sig. Thanks.

Availability of snake shot loads.

Michael Courtney

 

[Charshooter]

Nice chart, seems to show that the 9mm is not very effective, if we take all our conclusions from the chart. I favor the 45 ACP and would use a 400 Corbon if I felt in serious danger, or the Bren 10 auto which is not the same as the 40 S&W.

 

[juliet charley]

A decade of debate hasn't produced a clear winner because some of the experts choose to obfuscate the debate with flawed rhetoric rather than sound science.

Prime example:

The .357 Sig isn't tremendously better than the 9mm or .40 S&W, but it does have some real and tangible advantages.

 

[Mike P. Wagner]

A decade of debate hasn't produced a clear winner because some of the experts choose to obfuscate the debate with flawed rhetoric rather than sound science.

I am not that I buy this. When the science is strong and definitive, it ovewhelms the rhetoric.

I think that the problem is more complicated than excessive rhetoric: we have a very small data set (shootings about which we have accurate data) for a large number of variables. It seems like you have to make some kind of simplifying assumptions, and it is not yet clear which assumptions are appropriate. if you clean the data too much (given the small data set size), you don't have enough left! If on the other hand, you try too build a simple model (ballistic gel), it;'s very hard to know if the model you have build has any predictive value in non-experimental conditions.

It's not clear yet to me how this should be resolved.

Mike

 

[OBIWAN]

"The .357 Sig isn't tremendously better than the 9mm or .40 S&W, but it does have some real and tangible advantages"

Actually, I don;t find any factual problems with this quote

The .357S gives you a very slight edge in velocity over the fastest 9mm loads and it does it at standard pressure

The loads that I tested all shot flatter than the .40 cal loads and were more accurate but YMMV

So yes...not tremendously better....but there are some advantages

Now...whether those advantages matter to you or are important enough to choose the round...that becomes subjective

In the end...while I liked my G32, 239, and G35 w/ bar-sto barrel I decided the extra velocity was not important enough to stock an extra caliber

 

[juliet charley]

The .357S gives you a very slight edge in velocity over the fastest 9mm loads and it does it at standard pressure

The 9x19 gives a significant edge over the 357 SIG with heavier bullets (147-grain)--and at standard pressure.

The loads that I tested all shot flatter than the .40 cal loads and were more accurate but YMMV

I've found no accuracy differences between the 357 SIG and any other service calibre at normal combat ranges and normal combat scenarios. I do prefer the heavier bullets available in the .40 S&W.

So yes...not tremendously better....but there are some advantages

Depends on what you consider advantages--capacity, heavier bullets, quicker follow-ups clearly favour the 357 SIG's fellow .36 calibre the 9x19; heavier bullets, bigger (diameter) bullets, larger permanent cavity, greater bullet selection clearly favour the .40 S&W. It really boils down the the 357 SIG being just another choice--nothing more and nothing less.

 

[OBIWAN]

I got no dog in this fight *, but I hate letting bad info fester


"The 9x19 gives a significant edge over the 357 SIG with heavier bullets (147-grain)--and at standard pressure. "

Hmm...just checked Harnady's 147 gr - xtp loads...purely as an example

9mm 975 fps and 310 ftlbs

357S 1225/490

Two loads from the same mfg...not apples and oranges...straight up standard pressure loads for each

Now you might be able to find a load in each caliber that would tip the scales the other way, but except for +P and +P+ loads I don;t know of any 9mm loads that come close to the .357S in terms of velocity

And one thing I like about the sig is that you get that velocity (and attatched recoil) every time

Not just when you practice with your carry loads

I personally use 147gr RA9T for carry ammo....so my practice ammo morrirs my carry ammo pretty well

But I know lots of people that train with the wimpiest (cheapest) 9MM they can find and rarely (if ever) shoot their blistering hot (and expensive) carry ammo

My other comments were admittedly subjective....and I stated them as such

I completely agree that 9mm gets a (small) advantage in capacity over both of the others

* as I said ...I got no use for .40 and I no longer own any .357 Sig- so tell me...who is more objective?

 

[juliet charley]

Hmm...just checked Harnady's 147 gr - xtp loads...purely as an example

9mm 975 fps and 310 ftlbs

357S 1225/490

Speaking of festering "bad info," you're assuming the only significant factors are MV and ME. There's considerably more to the effectiveness equation than MV and ME. The Hornady XTP (bullet) offers no where the performance of the Ranger T (bullet). Also, you might note, that with the 357 SIG, if you stick to major manufacturers, you are pretty well limited to one 147-grain load (Hornady XTP) whereas the 9x19 offers a much wider selection of 147-grain loads (the aforemetioned Ranger T, Gold Dot, Silvertip, Golden Sabre, etc.). The 9x19 does have a significant edge over the 357 SIG when it comes heavier bullets (when you lose the tunnel vision that sees only MV and ME).

BTW, since you did make a point practice/training, there 147-grain practice/training loads available for the 9x19, are there any low cost 147-grain rounds available in 357 SIG?

As stated earlier, it really depends on what you consider advantages and when it comes to heavier bullets the 9x19 has several over the 357 SIG (including the Ranger T, low-cost practice training/practice ammo and a variety of other good bullet selections).



and if you really want to play the "objectivity game," (as if it changes the facts) the only autoloader I currently have is a 9x18.

 

[OBIWAN]

Please....I am begging you......make sense man!

Obiwan
The .357S gives you a very slight edge in velocity over the fastest 9mm loads and it does it at standard pressure


JC
The 9x19 gives a significant edge over the 357 SIG with heavier bullets (147-grain)--and at standard pressure



I was speaking of velocity...which you quoted while stating 147 gr was better

Now faced with proof of the moderate velocity I spoke of you fall back on bullet design

Show me where I mentioned bullet design

If you need me to splain....ask questions ...but do NOT try to put words in my mouth

For some things...like barrier penetration ....extra velocity is nice

There is also nothing wrong with the terminal performance with well designed bullets....incidently there are a lot of hyper velocity 9mm loads out there that stink

Nowhere did I say it (velocity) is the be all and end all..I got no tunnel vision...but you got either some reading comprehension issues or english is your second language

The best .357 Sig loads are about equal to the best 9mm, .45 and .40 loads in terminal performance...too close to worry about


"experts choose to obfuscate the debate with flawed rhetoric "

Shoe fit????????????????

 

[OBIWAN]

"you are pretty well limited to one 147-grain load (Hornady XTP)"




"NOTE: The bullets used in the picture of the bare gelatin shots were all Federal HST's, however, the picture would look exactly the same if Federal Tactical, Speer Gold Dot, or Winchester Ranger Talon were used instead...Also of note, the wound tracks were dyed in them to make them easier to see--the color differences with the dye has no meaning. I personally don't like to dye gelatin because it overemphasizes the temporary cavity. The permanent cavity is the primary bullet track where the tissue is crushed by direct contact with the bullet, while the temporary cavity is the area of stretch spreading radially away from the bullet track.The photos illustrating the recovered bullets depict Gold Dot in 357 Sig and Ranger Talons for the other calibers--they represent optimum performance in each caliber"

 

[OBIWAN]

Oh yeah...I bought 147 gr sig ammo all the time for about $12 for 50

About what I pay for heavier 9mm

 

[Prophet]

Thanks OBI I think i'll stick with my 45ACP. I've showed my friend what all of you have been saying and he thinks he'll stick with his .357sig so thanks for everyone's input.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Just do like I do gents, have your .357 Sig carry gun and a 9mm version for practice. Wonderful thing is you don't have to clean that practice gun after every session (something you would do with the carry gun.)

Do that or get a 9mm barrel for the .357 Sig (works in Glocks, get a Lonewolf replacement barrel.) Then you have a 9mm/.357 Sig.

OR.... Reload! Dillion makes the Square Deal B in .357 Sig, and happly the Sig uses 9mm slugs and just a tad more power.

See, it's easy to have the extra power of the .357 Sig and the lower cost of the 9mm.

 

[krept]

My understanding is that the vaunted 125gr .357 Magnum load was an effective stopper because of bullet design... it essentially fragmented and dumped its energy in a relatively short space.

However, in the 357 SIG bullets, the velocity and diameter (bascially) was duplicated but the bullet construction resulted in a diminished fragmentation effect with greater penetration. Whether this is a result of the different ogive or bonded jackets, I can't tell.

Using backwards reasoning, if someone were to shoot a tungsten 125gr .357 Magnum, I highly doubt it would be nearly as effective as the legendary loading in the same weight. In light of this, I feel many overlook the aspect of bullet construction when comparing Magnums to SIGs.

As they say, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Case in point... and a nod to the .40 vs. the 357 SIG is the .40's 135gr loadings vs. the 180gr loadings. The former bullet, with less sectional density, will (or should) come closer to replicate the energy dump of the .357 Magnum because of the light weight combined with the greater meplat/frontal surface area. On the flipside, the 180gr loading will (or should) exhibit greater penetration and less expansion.

While the aforementioned gelatin photograph looks nice (I first saw it a while back on Suarez's forum), it's kind of silly to me to think that the shots were strung vertically in the same block of gelatin as presented. Not only are we commiting the fallacy of a small sample size (one example/bullet) we also don't know if fifty bullets were shot with each bullet type and a single example was cherry picked from each to show what most of us know... factory handgun bullets are basically equal... they suck compared to rifles. Indeed it is a compromise.

 

[44 AMP]

.357 Magnum

That round is overcharged as evidenced by increased performance from a carbine (post 23).

Anyone here besides me see anything odd with that statement?

Every handgun round I know from .22 on up gets increased performance from a carbine, due to the longer than handgun length barrel. So I guess they are all "overcharged"?

Where do some of these ideas come from?