357 SIGnificant? Need opinions...

K

krept

New member
Hello all... first off, I'm waving the white flag of truce and not meaning to start a caliber war. This is something that I, being new to the .40, have been pondering. I originally went with the .40 because it seemed to be great round on paper and it is more plentiful that the Sig round around here. Because I have found it accurate and easily controllable I am very happy with it so far...

I'm currently debating purchasing a 357 Sig barrel for my G27, but am wondering if there is actually much to gain over, say, buying an extra $120 worth of .40 ammo. I'm actually very confused about this round.

People say that the Sig round has a nasty penchant for overpenetration, yet from the studies I have seen it is essentially in the same league as a 9mm +P(+?) and people do not decry this round for overpenetration. In fact, I have seen data that shows this round penetrates less than the 230gr .45 ACP JHPs. I'm lost...

Additionally, "they" say that this round is equal in lethality to the ominous lighter .357 Magnum rounds, yet several different literary sources mentioned that LE agencies that have switched to this round are "impressed with the number of non-lethal shootings that this round has produced."

Again, I'm wondering if there is anything to be gained by having a 357 Sig BBL for my G27. At this point, lets rule out accuracy because the .40/G27 combo is more accurate than I am, but I'm more than happy with it's performance for the time being. Sure, it would be cool to be able to switch between calibers, but from what I have heard, I almost would feel better off going with the 9mm conversions and saving the money on ammo expenses in the long run.

Any thoughts, pro or con regarding the barrel switch? Is there SIGnificant enough a reason to warrant going from a .40 or 9mm to the 357 SIG in a G27? Or should I just keep taking the .40 medicine that I already have been prescribed and be on with it...

Thanks again...
 
Can't see as it's worth the bother. .357Sig is generally agreed to be louder and have more recoil, but can basically be thought of as a 9mm +p++. Some folks argue that it is marginally more effective than .40, but it seems to me that the jury is still out -- just not enough data to decide one way or the other. It might be more reliable in some guns, due to the bottle-necked design. But I suspect your Glock 27 is already very reliable, so nothing much to be gained there either.

So, if you want to spend some money so that you can be more expensive ammo, go ahead. But I suspect you'd be better of just spending that same money buying more .40S&W ammo and getting in more practice.

M1911, donning his flame retardant suit...
 
IMO, it's just another calibre in search of a mission. I have a hi-cap 9 mike mike so I really don't need it. I don't want another 9mm bullet...I want to step up. I like the heavier bullet weights in the forty. Personally, since I have a 9mm and a 45 I can't justify something in-between. Just my thoughts, J. Parker
 
Thanks for the input guys. I would have gone straight away with the 9mm (G26) but decided that I wanted to hold off getting a 9mm until I can afford a P7M8. I'll spend the cash on ammo and probably reserve the SIG round for a Sig. I am also a diehard .45 fan, but decided to go for .40 due to the smaller frame vs the G29 or G30 (and it had to be a Glock, don't ask why :D).

Extra barrels (especially around $100) and other goodies are so very, very tempting, but all of you are right, the money would be best served honing my skills with the .40.
 
Sig 357 in Glock Sub-Compact is...

The 357 Sig in a Model 27 is a handfull! It is louder, kicks more, and has a lot of muzzle flash but it is a fun to shoot. Everything I have read says the 125 gr Sig is equal in stopping power to the 357 magnum and that isn't all bad. Look for ammo with a low muzzle flash and you will be fine. I think the recoil is up there with a 44 magnum in a 4" barrel but again the 357 is a hoot to shoot! Regards, Richard
 
Save your money.

A necked down 40 cartridge shotting 9mm sized bullets.

Just get a 10mm G29/G20 for real punch.
 
I am not yet sold on the .357SIG, although I do find it an interesting round. I converted my SIG P229 to it a while back.
The idea that the recoil is sharper compared to a .40 is incorrect, from my experience. At least in the P229, the apparent recoil is softer than in .40 caliber. I found the .357 more pleaseant to shoot than the .40.
The noise level, however, is louder, and that could be of concern.
YMMV.
Charles
 
Go with the 357 SIG. It is flexible and can be loud, quiet, big flash, little or no flash, slow 995 fps, fast 1450 fps, etc.
 
I have a Glock 31 in 357 SIG and simply love the gun and the 357 SIG cartrige. Out of the long G31 barrel the 357 SIG will do everything the venerable 357 magnum will do with a much higher ammo capacity.
Besides, it's just another barrel you're looking at, not a whole new gun. Spend a little to get the 357 barrel and add some cool versatility to you 40 S&W.
 
Try running the numbers on these loads using the Defensive Power Factor I just explained over in the General Handgun forum...
I think that this might open your eyes.
 
Flawed Data

""Try running the numbers on these loads using the Defensive Power Factor I just explained over in the General Handgun forum...
I think that this might open your eyes""


I think your formula is flawed. Why do rifles get divided by 100 instead of 1000 like handguns? You're not comparing apples to oranges, you're comparing bullets to bullets.
Are you deliberately trying to make rifles look better than they actually are in regards to momentum or inertia to illustrate your point?


So what if the caliber is smaller and the bullet weighs less? As long as it can dump more energy into it's target, it will do a better job of tearing something up.


A 45 grain .223 Federal blitz is classified as "minor caliber" , it won't knock over a steel popper if the shot is low, has almost zero recoil, but if you were to be shot in the shoulder, it would take your arm off.


The United States Secret Service adopted the 357 SIG and it does out penetrate the .40 & the .45, and dumps more energy into it's target.

Here's something to think about...

If I press my finger on the center of your chest as hard as I can, I would be able to tip you over.

If I press an icepick to the center of your chest it will probably find your aorta and kill you without tipping you over.

Which one has the smaller diameter? (ice pick)

Which one penetrated better? (ice pick)

Which one has more momentum? (finger)

This simple analogy doesn't even mention energy.


Heck I don't mean to argue with you or anything, some people like big fat bullets, others like small fast ones.

I happen to like both and I am biased toward the 357 SIG
 
I truly think the 357 SIG is the superior cartridge over the .40. Especially in Glocks.

But, I do not think it is superior enough to go buy a new gun. A new barrel, maybe.

On the other hand if someone where buying a new gun and wanted real power and performance in a small package, I would advise the 357 SIG.

In your case, I would buy yourself a bunch of practice ammo. Or maybe better yet, buy some defensive loads and run them through your gun and check the accuracy, POI, and reliability just to be sure. Or, use the money toward some good training. JMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top