9mm vs. .357 magnum-Myth Busted

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rangerrich99

New member
So here's the deal: in the recent past, I've been hearing about how 9mm is just as effective a round as .357 magnum, at the range, from various Youtube 'experts,' as well as magazine articles, and even on this forum. And when I say 'effective,' I mean energy delivered to target and damage created by bullets.

This never made much sense to me, as it's pretty easy to eyeball a 9mm cartridge vs. a .357 magnum cartridge, or disassemble one and see the difference in powder charges. But the 9mm fans will poo-poo away these differences, usually saying something along the lines of "there's so much gas leakage at the forcing cone of a revolver that it cancels any advantage the .357 magnum has in greater powder charge." Or that all testing of .357 magnums to achieve the velocities stated are done with 8-inch barreled guns, and that if 4- or 2-inch barreled revolvers were used no .357 magnum round would be faster than a typical 9mm round.

Well, Mr. Paul Harrell, which many of us are familiar with, finally did a test of this myth, and the myth is finally busted. Enjoy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2t_qG9dls&feature=em-subs_digest

And the best part about all of this is that my sense of reality has been proven correct.
 
Most of the 9mm proponents don't necessarily argue that other calibers don't have greater energy, or even nominally better wounding ability... Just that these slight differences do not overcome the capacity and recoil advantage that 9mm offers. I happen to mostly agree with this.

Some ardent 9mm supporters will tell you that all handgun calibers are poor man-stoppers. I agree with caveats, 357 being one of them. I dont think it is a great "one shoot stop" caliber, hell many rifles aren't. It is not "poor." 158gn projectiles traveling at 1500 fps isnt anything to sneeze at. The argument works better with 9mm vs 40 vs 45, although even then I don't buy that 45 having more wounding ability is statistically insignificant as some would say.
 
With comparable bullet weights, the 357 is capable of significantly more velocity. Stands to reason it delivers more energy to the target than the 9mm.

People actually think that the 9mm is a harder hitter than a 357???? Shot placement and all of the other variables aside for a moment, the 357 is simply more powerful in every way.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, just no way even a +P+ 9mm compares to a hot .357 magnum from a 4" or longer barrel. It's a great cartridge, but so is the 9mm, and of course the 9mm has many advantages without turning this into a semi auto vs revolver thread.
 
RIDE-RED 350r said:
With comparable bullet weights, the 357 is capable of more velocity. Stands to reason it delivers more energy to the target than the 9mm.

People actually think that the 9mm is a harder hitter than a 357???? Shot placement and all of the other variables aside for a moment, the 357 is simply more powerful in every way.
Click to expand...
Yes, there people that I've met, people on this forum, and so on that apparently believe that somehow the hottest 9mm (+P) ammunition runs as hot or hotter than .357 magnum.
 
TXAZ said:
I'm willing to bet 17 rounds of 9mm can stop more threats than 6 hot .357 rounds.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with that statement, however that wasn't the premise of the video.

Is anyone actually watching the video? The parameters of the testing is explained right at the beginning.
 
I just got done with the video...and interestingly enough, he demonstrated that in fact the 357 can do the same level of damage with less shots than the 9. Lol! Cool vid!

But yes, you can theoretically stop 17 threats with 17 9mm and only 6 with the 357. But that isn't what the supposed debate and video demo is about.
 
I will add that the video doesn't use the greatest methods, and he sort of proves 9mms strong points when he takes twice as long destroying the cinder block with the 357 because he needed a reload.

Also, a cinder block!? We're doing effectiveness studies with cinder blocks!? I could understand a hard barrier penetration test... But this wasnt that.
 
One guy, 2 guns proves nothing. I've done the same test My 4" Glock 9mm pistols shooting 124 gr ammo runs 1250-1300 fps. My 4" Smith 28 mag 357 shooting 125 gr ammo runs about 1300-1350. Lots of others have repeated the same tests and got similar results.

No one said that 9mm was as fast or faster than 357. Just that as a rule it is within 100 fps and pretty darn close.

But by picking and choosing your guns and loads you can prove anything you set out to prove. It isn't unusual for different guns shooting the same ammo to be 100 fps or more different.

Look at this example.

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

The 4" Smith 686 is consistently up to 100 fps FASTER than either the 6" Python or 5+" 627. And with the shorter barrel.

Pick a "fast" 357 and compare it to a "slow" 9mm and you prove the 357 is significantly better. I can pick a "fast" 9mm and compare it to a "slow" 357 and prove 9mm beats 357 mag.

And when comparing carry guns it is the overall length that matters. My 4" Glock is about the same overall length as a 2.5" revolver. The 5" Beretta is about the same size as a 3" revolver. Start comparing 4" 9mm to 2.5" and 3" 357's and it is a virtual tie. If you compare the best 124gr 9mm loads to 125gr 357 mag with a 3" barrel 9mm wins every time in the BBTI link.

Where the 357 wins is with heavier bullets. If you need heavies, then 9mm can't compete. But with 124/125 gr bullets on a level playing field the 2 are pretty close.
 
jmr40 said:
One guy, 2 guns proves nothing. I've done the same test My 4" Glock 9mm pistols shooting 124 gr ammo runs 1250-1300 fps. My 4" Smith 28 mag 357 shooting 125 gr ammo runs about 1300-1350. Lots of others have repeated the same tests and got similar results.

No one said that 9mm was as fast or faster than 357. Just that as a rule it is within 100 fps and pretty darn close.

But by picking and choosing your guns and loads you can prove anything you set out to prove. It isn't unusual for different guns shooting the same ammo to be 100 fps or more different.

Look at this example.

http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

The 4" Smith 686 is consistently up to 100 fps FASTER than either the 6" Python or 5+" 627. And with the shorter barrel.

Pick a "fast" 357 and compare it to a "slow" 9mm and you prove the 357 is significantly better. I can pick a "fast" 9mm and compare it to a "slow" 357 and prove 9mm beats 357 mag.

And when comparing carry guns it is the overall length that matters. My 4" Glock is about the same overall length as a 2.5" revolver. The 5" Beretta is about the same size as a 3" revolver. Start comparing 4" 9mm to 2.5" and 3" 357's and it is a virtual tie. If you compare the best 124gr 9mm loads to 125gr 357 mag with a 3" barrel 9mm wins every time in the BBTI link.

Where the 357 wins is with heavier bullets. If you need heavies, then 9mm can't compete. But with 124/125 gr bullets on a level playing field the 2 are pretty close.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying and agree with it for the most part, but in Mr. Harrell's test he purposely used some of the hottest 9mm +P ammo he could find, and very average Remington green box .357 magnum, and the .357 magnum rounds averaged more than 250 fps faster. Out of what looks to be a very utilitarian 4-inch revolver. On a side note: I can produce 158 grain .357 magnum rounds that average about 1425 fps. I can't remember the energy of those rounds but I'm willing to bet that those numbers are significantly higher than anything a 9mm can produce. That's out of my stock Ruger GP-100 4-inch barrel.

And again, the test has nothing to do with how easy it is to carry either gun, only that the myth that 9mm +P is just as powerful as .357 magnum can be proven to be false.
 
The short barreled sp101 with 125gr jhp was still head and shoulders more velocity than the +p 9mm 124gr out of the 4.75" Beretta. It was demonstrated in the video. Yeah, different guns and all that, but I just don't see "slow" or "fast" guns closing the gap by that much.

Nothing wrong with a 9mm, but a 357 it ain't. It's like saying a 45 Auto +p is just as powerful as a "Ruger spec" 45 Colt or a 44 Mag.
 
RIDE-RED 350r said:
The short barreled sp101 with 125gr jhp was still head and shoulders more velocity than the +p 9mm 124gr out of the 4.75" Beretta. It was demonstrated in the video. Yeah, different guns and all that, but I just don't see "slow" or "fast" guns closing the gap by that much.

Nothing wrong with a 9mm, but a 357 it ain't. It's like saying a 45 Auto +p is just as powerful as a "Ruger spec" 45 Colt or a 44 Mag.
Click to expand...
That in particular surprised me more than any other part of the testing. I guess I've been told so many times by so many 9mm fans that a.357 magnum round fired from a snub-nosed revolver loses so much velocity from the combination of the short barrel and the forcing cone gas leakage that it left the barrel no faster than a 9mm, that I started believing it.

Now I know better. And hopefully everyone who sees that video will know the truth as well.
 
I watched the video too. It just confirmed what I already knew. I don't understand what the point is in all these caliber wars in the first place. It all seems a bit juvenile to me.
 
I've never heard of anyone on any forum claiming that 9mm is as hot as .357 magnum.

I have heard people claim that 9mm +P+ is as hot as .357Sig.
 
Okay, right at the beginning of the video he states that he's not trying to get into the caliber war stuff. He simply wanted to test the idea that 9mm +P was as powerful and effective as .357 magnum, as several of his viewers asked the question.

I have been told this myth several times, from people I've met at the range, and in a couple threads on this forum and at least once on another one.

And as I said, just looking at the cartridges side-by-side makes the premise seem foolish.

Anyway, I was just gratified to find an actual scientifically designed test/series of tests that made sense to me. Take it for what you will, but I was not trying to start a caliber war with my OP. If anyone takes it there, well that's on them.
 
I too was a little surprised by how the sp101 performed. My last comment shows me disagreeing with JMR40 more than I really do. I actually mostly agree with him. But, I think to be fair the condition and build quality of the weapons being tested should be very comparable. What I mean is, if you take a revolver with a shot out barrel, throats at max spec and a max cylinder gap (ie worn out and not really performing on par) to a match grade 9mm well then that's not really a fair comparison. After all, the question is really basically about the catridges more than the various platforms in which they are used in. Now i'm not saying it would be fair to compare a new PC Smith 357 to a Beretta 92 with 15k rounds through it either.



A thing is what it is, and it ain't what it ain't. Some folks just don't want to accept that
 
I often rely upon a 3” GP100. Using Critical Defense 125gn 357 mag, I get over 1300fps.
But I’m also a fan of 9mm...My first centerfire SD pistol was a Radom, and I was carrying a HiPower when most cops still had Model 10’s.
 
A .357 is more powerful than a 9mm. Wow! If you were a law enforcement officer would you prefer a 6 round .357 revolver with additional cartridges in your belt or a 10-11 round 9mm semiautomatic handgun with a couple of extra magazines on your belt? Law officers have a duty to enforce the law; they don't have a duty to kill criminals.
 
I have never heard anyone say the 9mm can equal a 357 Mag. Ever.

I would question their sanity if I did.

I am getting 1400 fps from factory 125 grain Speer Gold Dots in my p226 357 SIG. It has 13 round magazines. That is better than picking a 9mm for capacity or a revolver for power, you can have both.

357 SIG, just sayin'

;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top