jwalker497
New member
I would go with the Sig 239, its just classy
Which .357 Sig handgun?
- Thread starter ATN082268
- Start date
Walt Sherrill
New member
I think the SIG P229 was the first SIG developed expressly for the .357 SIG round. And while it's a slightly smaller 226, I'm sure the changes made to the 229 to make it hold up under usage were also added to the 226 versions that were offered in .357 SIG. (Locking blocks and heavier slides?)
Here in NC, the NC Highway Patrol switched to .357 SIG several years ago, using the S&W M&P Pros. Lots of problems, mostly encountered during qualification sessions -- as most LEOs don't use their handguns all that often -- and S&W sent teams of specialists down to resolve them. They were NOT successful. (The NCHP wanted the .357 SIG round because it does a better job against windshield glass, and weren't willing to switch back to the .40 S&W round.) the NCHP switched over to SIGs. Those seem to run fine.
Here in NC, the NC Highway Patrol switched to .357 SIG several years ago, using the S&W M&P Pros. Lots of problems, mostly encountered during qualification sessions -- as most LEOs don't use their handguns all that often -- and S&W sent teams of specialists down to resolve them. They were NOT successful. (The NCHP wanted the .357 SIG round because it does a better job against windshield glass, and weren't willing to switch back to the .40 S&W round.) the NCHP switched over to SIGs. Those seem to run fine.
Walt Sherrill
New member
Deaf Smith said:
You may be right and there aren't any maintenance issues, but...
With THAT MANY DIFFERENT GLOCKS, you can't be putting a LOT of rounds through any of the .357 versions -- unless you have more free hours in your day and a much more healthy ammo/reloading budget than many of us. (Particularly if you're shooting your 19 or 26 at all.)
Your friend should shoot first anything he plans on using for defense. The .357SIG is a very loud round, and deafening indoors. Of course, any gun will be loud, but this one is louder than many. And, depending on the ammo used, it can be flashy. Blind and deaf at night with one or more bad guys in my house is not my ideal situation. I do have one, and I enjoy shooting it, but it is not my nightstand gun.
Deaf Smith
New member
Rumors don't help guys. I've owned Glocks in 26, 27, 33, 19, 23, 32, 17, 31, 22, 20, and 29 (yes 10mm.)
I've competed in IDPA for many years using Glocks in 17, 19, and 26 formats. One of my 17s went well beyond 100,000 rounds (yes I reload, and I reload in quantity.)
My 26 carry gun has a 26 PRACTICE gun I don't clean. I can count on that 26 to go at least 750 rounds without cleaning (maybe even a 1000 but I shoot lots of .22s with a AACK unit and thus I clean it now and then.)
I've also competed in the Glock .vs. 1911 matches where you cannot clean your gun at all for 1000 rounds (part match, part test.) Both Glocks in 17 and 22 (.40 S&W) went 1000 rounds.
The only guns that go 1000 rounds consistently are the Glocks in 19 and 17 flavors. Strange most Glock .45s didn't make 1000. Few 1911s make the grade to.
Folks, there ain't any 'maintenance issues' with Glocks of any kind.
Oh, and about how much flash the .357 Sig has and loudness, that's all Internet BS.
They use flash retardant powders, just as in the .357 Magnum (and that cartridge is kind of loud to, just as .40 S&W.)
And keep in mind 14.5 inch barrel 5.56 rifles are kind of loud to.
So get away from rumors where you head someone say this or that. Go look up the facts and talk to people who actually DO use the weapons and ammo.
Deaf
Walt Sherrill
New member
Deaf Smith -- how many rounds have you put through your .357 SIG-based Glocks?
We know you've used the 9mm versions a lot and even have some duplicates, by your own comments, of your 9mm guns. And we know you shoot the .45 competitively. There's only so many hours in the day and you can only generally shoot one at a time. That spreads the work load over a lot of guns.
Tell us about your .357 SIG Glocks? How often do you use them, and how many rounds through them?
I'm not a Glock basher -- I like'm. I think they're pretty rugged. I'm just curious about how hard the .357 round is on guns... Your response above didn't really address service life or usage.
TfflHndn re: your comments about flash and noise:
In the house, anything is going to be loud and probably bright, and cause you problems.
Part of your home defense gear should be an inexpensive (if you can't afford better) set (or two) of electronic muffs... Not only will they protect your hearing, which can be permanently damaged if you shoot inside, but they'll also help you HEAR the other person, if there is one.
We know you've used the 9mm versions a lot and even have some duplicates, by your own comments, of your 9mm guns. And we know you shoot the .45 competitively. There's only so many hours in the day and you can only generally shoot one at a time. That spreads the work load over a lot of guns.
Tell us about your .357 SIG Glocks? How often do you use them, and how many rounds through them?
I'm not a Glock basher -- I like'm. I think they're pretty rugged. I'm just curious about how hard the .357 round is on guns... Your response above didn't really address service life or usage.
TfflHndn re: your comments about flash and noise:
In the house, anything is going to be loud and probably bright, and cause you problems.
Part of your home defense gear should be an inexpensive (if you can't afford better) set (or two) of electronic muffs... Not only will they protect your hearing, which can be permanently damaged if you shoot inside, but they'll also help you HEAR the other person, if there is one.
Over the years, Ive owned 20 Glocks. All but one were 9mm. The oddball was a 357SIG.
The only two I had any trouble with, were a 80's era Gen 1 17, and the Gen 3 31.
The 17 had something wrong with the trigger that they could not get straitened out, even with multiple trips back to Glock, and basically all parts but the frame replaced. They should have just gave me a new gun.
The 31 was battering itself to death, with no apparent sign of giving up doing so.
I have a 17 and 26 Im currently shooting, that have over 100,000 rounds between them. My 17 just past 76,000 last month. Those high count guns show very little wear, and my 17 actually has more +P+ 9mm (comparable to 357SIG pressure wise) through it, than the 31 had 357SIG through it, and its only shows minor finish wear, where the 31 was heavily peening.
For some reason, my 31 wasnt doing very well, and its round count with 357SIG, was pretty low. I put a 9mm LWD conversion barrel in it and actually shot more 9mm out of it than I did 357SIG.
I also had 5 SIG's in 357SIG, and a lot more rounds through each of them than the 31, and they never showed any sign of not handling the round.
As far as flash and loud... I never had any issues with flash, with factory or my reloads, indoors or out. The round does have a "bark", and it is somewhat noticeable, especially indoors. I dont think its as loud as a 357MAG though.
The only two I had any trouble with, were a 80's era Gen 1 17, and the Gen 3 31.
The 17 had something wrong with the trigger that they could not get straitened out, even with multiple trips back to Glock, and basically all parts but the frame replaced. They should have just gave me a new gun.
The 31 was battering itself to death, with no apparent sign of giving up doing so.
I have a 17 and 26 Im currently shooting, that have over 100,000 rounds between them. My 17 just past 76,000 last month. Those high count guns show very little wear, and my 17 actually has more +P+ 9mm (comparable to 357SIG pressure wise) through it, than the 31 had 357SIG through it, and its only shows minor finish wear, where the 31 was heavily peening.
For some reason, my 31 wasnt doing very well, and its round count with 357SIG, was pretty low. I put a 9mm LWD conversion barrel in it and actually shot more 9mm out of it than I did 357SIG.
I also had 5 SIG's in 357SIG, and a lot more rounds through each of them than the 31, and they never showed any sign of not handling the round.
As far as flash and loud... I never had any issues with flash, with factory or my reloads, indoors or out. The round does have a "bark", and it is somewhat noticeable, especially indoors. I dont think its as loud as a 357MAG though.
Deaf Smith
New member
Walt, not a huge amount.
But I've put a lot of 'em through the Glock 22 (.40 S&W) and that's pretty close as there is not much difference as for wear between the two rounds.
I prefer the .357 Sig cause the stronger case leaves very little chance to a kaboom as the .40 was prone to do.
Never had a problem with the .40, so I see no reason to think my .357 Sigs will have any.
Now I doubt it will last as long as the 9mm version, but 80,000 it ought to go.
Deaf
But I've put a lot of 'em through the Glock 22 (.40 S&W) and that's pretty close as there is not much difference as for wear between the two rounds.
I prefer the .357 Sig cause the stronger case leaves very little chance to a kaboom as the .40 was prone to do.
Never had a problem with the .40, so I see no reason to think my .357 Sigs will have any.
Now I doubt it will last as long as the 9mm version, but 80,000 it ought to go.
Deaf
Walt Sherrill
New member
Deaf Smith said:
That may be your experience, but that has apparently NOT been the case with many others shooting the round.
For reasons that aren't intuitively obvious, there seems to be something substantially different between how some guns handle the .40 S&W round and .357 SIG round -- even though they are physically and ballistically similar. (You'd expect a gun designed to shoot the .40 round should be able to shoot the .357 round, which is basically [I'm oversimplifying] a .40 case, necked down to fire a 9mm bullet.)
It will be interesting to see whether your experience changes as you start to put more rounds through your .357 Glocks.
Deaf Smith
New member
Well the .40 kicks a bit more and the .357 sig is a bit snappier.
I own the 31, 32, and 33. All the ammo I've fired is factory (.40 S&W is much easier to reload.)
The .357 sig though, works at 5000 cup more pressure than the .40, and the .357 Sig is NOT a necked down .40. The case is thicker at the web.
I consider my Glock 31 is the ultimate .357 sig due to it's polygon rifling.
That gives 5 percent more velocity for any given load and barrel length.
It really can launch a 125gr JHP at a true 1500 fps from the Glock 31, and that ain't bad at all.
Tell me about all those people that have experience with the .357 Sig. Would like to hear their experiences.
Deaf
I own the 31, 32, and 33. All the ammo I've fired is factory (.40 S&W is much easier to reload.)
The .357 sig though, works at 5000 cup more pressure than the .40, and the .357 Sig is NOT a necked down .40. The case is thicker at the web.
I consider my Glock 31 is the ultimate .357 sig due to it's polygon rifling.
That gives 5 percent more velocity for any given load and barrel length.
It really can launch a 125gr JHP at a true 1500 fps from the Glock 31, and that ain't bad at all.
Tell me about all those people that have experience with the .357 Sig. Would like to hear their experiences.
Deaf
I always found the 40 to be the snappier. The 357SIG is very much like +P, +P+ 9mm, and I'd be willing to bet, if you didnt know what was what, you couldnt tell what you were shooting.
Ive shot a 17 and a 31 side by side, as well as both calibers out of the same 31, and the only difference noticeable, was the 357's bark. The way the guns performed and handled, was basically identical.
357SIG isnt any harder, just requires one more step if you use a 40 carbide sizer.
You do have to watch that you dont get any 40 cases mixed in, as they will come out of the sizing die, looking like a 357SIG, and while a little to short, can easily be reloaded and shot.
Thats how I happened to find out it it was possible. I found a piece of 357SIG brass with a 40 S&W head stamp, while sizing a batch of just fired brass. I started to pay more attention as I was loading, and found a couple more just in that lot.
I understand that the 357SIG brass is built differently, but its absolutely possible, to use 40 brass by mistake, and shoot and reload it again and again. I dont have any idea how many times I had reloaded those 40 cases, but I suspect it was more than a couple, as I was rotating through a couple of thousand pieces of brass on a weekly basis, and hadnt been around a range where 40 was present when I was picking up my brass.
I cant tell you exactly how many pieces of 40 brass were in the whole lot, as I quit bothering to look, but I never had an issue with them .
Walt Sherrill
New member
Deaf Smith said:
You say you've not had any special maintenance issues, but then go on to say, in effect, you've really not shot your .357 SIG Glocks a lot. Your comments suggest that you shoot more .40 and 9mm, and maybe .45 than .357 SIG.
For a year or two my son, a NC Highway Patrol State Trooper, told me of the problems the NCHP was having with S&W M&O Pros in .357 SIG. (The problems were seen at the range, during periodic practice and qualifying sessions -- as thankfully, they don't have to use their weapons that much in their day-to-day work, and they are equipped with carbines, which may be better.)
In trying to find solutions, the NCHP contacted a lot of agencies, and S&W sent teams of their experts to NC to find a fix. In contacting other agencies, the NCHP found ran into some discussion of models of .357 SIG Glocks used by LEOs -- I never got the details -- and it wasn't a big problem; but long-term durability was questioned for a few guns. (Perhaps it was the more-compact models, and perhaps their armorers weren't following the prescribed maintenance guidelines?)
Since then, the NCHP returned their M&P Pros to S&W and replaced then with SIG P226s in .357 SIG. I've heard mention of problems with the newer SIGs, and I've heard of no SIG-related issues of any sort for the SIG handguns from any source.)
I have seen a few discussions of Glock issues with that round in these types of forums. (Read #4, above, again -- for an unsolicited example.) It may be limited to a specific model or size of handgun. Or it may simply be a quirk of some isolated individual guns.
On GlockTalk there is some discussion about agencies using the Glock 31s having to change out the recoil spring assemblies more frequently because of the greater slide velocities of the round, and some mention of slide peening; in the comments about peening, however, they say it isn't greatly different from what you see when looking at similarly high-round count Glock 22s.)
All of this may simply be business as usual for Glocks -- and no reason for concern, but I'm pretty sure the S&W M&P issue was NOT business as usual for S&W. I would note, too, that while S&W offers the M&P Pro in 9mm, .40, and .45, it no longer offers it in .357 SIG. Something is different about that round, and the difference seemed to affect the S&W design. (You can argue that S&W problems does not equate to Glock problems, and I wouldn't disagree.)
Last edited:
I haven't noticed any excessive wear, but my Glock 33 has only a few hundred rounds through it to verify function so I wouldn't really expect to see any wear yet. While mine has been 100% so far, I have noticed that it doesn't feed as smoothly as Glocks I've had in other calibers. It just naturally seems to want to plant the nose of the bullet into the feed ramp if the slide is cycled at anything less than full speed.
When I first got the gun and I was concerned about the rough feeding, I did a Google search. What I discovered was that nose dive malfunctions in 357 chambered Glocks don't appear to be all that uncommon. In fact there seemed to be no shortage of reports on the issue.
When I first got the gun and I was concerned about the rough feeding, I did a Google search. What I discovered was that nose dive malfunctions in 357 chambered Glocks don't appear to be all that uncommon. In fact there seemed to be no shortage of reports on the issue.
Every time this topic comes around you say your G31 was beating itself to death. How? Did you break multiple locking blocks? Slide peening? That's perfectly normal with any Glock with any amount of rounds through it. Google it. You must of had a defective pistol. Did you call Glock?
Here's my G32 with 2500+ rounds, certainly not beaten to death.
Deaf Smith
New member
Walt,
S&W M&Ps are not Glocks.
As far as I know:
The Tennessee Highway Patrol currently issues the Glock 31 pistol chambered in .357 SIG.
The Mississippi Highway Patrol issues the Glock 31 Gen4 in .357 SIG.
The Bedford Heights Police Department in Ohio currently issues the Glock 31/32/33.
The Elloree Police Department in South Carolina also issues the Glock 31 in .357 SIG, and the Madison Police Department in Madison, WV issues the Glock 32 in .357 SIG.
The Gouverneur Police Department in New York issues the Glock 32.
And they ain't crying.
I've maybe put 500 rnds through my 31 and 3k through the 32. And both were used guns when I got them so no telling how many rnds have been fired out of them. But considering the amount of rnds my Glock 22 has been through I can see no problems.
Deaf
S&W M&Ps are not Glocks.
As far as I know:
The Tennessee Highway Patrol currently issues the Glock 31 pistol chambered in .357 SIG.
The Mississippi Highway Patrol issues the Glock 31 Gen4 in .357 SIG.
The Bedford Heights Police Department in Ohio currently issues the Glock 31/32/33.
The Elloree Police Department in South Carolina also issues the Glock 31 in .357 SIG, and the Madison Police Department in Madison, WV issues the Glock 32 in .357 SIG.
The Gouverneur Police Department in New York issues the Glock 32.
And they ain't crying.
I've maybe put 500 rnds through my 31 and 3k through the 32. And both were used guns when I got them so no telling how many rnds have been fired out of them. But considering the amount of rnds my Glock 22 has been through I can see no problems.
Deaf
This was my 31 at only a couple of thousand rounds of 357SIG. It actually got worse, I just have a pic of it at this point. Wish I had one at the end. It got bad enough there where sharp burrs, over the edge of the slide, and I sliced my fingers on it a couple of times while cleaning, and had to file the burrs down.
Not the greatest pic, but if you look close you can see what Im referring to....
This is a pic of my one 17 when it had just past 70,000+ rounds. This gun has more +P+ 9mm through it, than the 357SIG had 357SIG through it. If you notice, there is only some slight finish wear, where the 31 was peening.
Ive been told by people who have 40's, that it is common, and would stop at some point. Mine never seemed to be slowing down.
Walt Sherrill
New member
Deaf Smith said:
No. I agree. (I said as much.) I didn't try to make any claim that they were similar.
My point was that while you consider the .40 and .357 rounds to be functionally similar with regard to how they cause weapon wear, THAT assertion has not been validated.
While a S&W isn't a Glock, the fact that the two rounds cause greater failures in the S&W does suggest that there might be more at play there than just functional equivalence. You say you've put 500 rounds through one Glock and 3000 through the other; I wouldn't expect to see any appreciable wear at those low levels of usage or function issues (unless you're shooting an M&P Pro in .357 SIG!
) I've owned a number of ex-LEO guns over the years, and "carried a lot, shot a little" seems an apt description. (All of mine had some holster wear but were pristine internally.)
Until the budget tightening dramas of the last 15 years or so, most LEO agencies encouraged their officers to shoot their guns. They didn't require it, and a surprising number of LEO don't shoot a lot. Before the budget crisis, a lot of agencies handed out free ammo to their officers. Now, their officers are encouraged to qualify a couple of times a year. But even back then, when they got free ammo and were encouraged to shoot regularly, a well-worn ex LEO gun found for sale was a rare beast.
My son is also issued an M16 equivalent which is kept stored in the back of his vehicle. If he wants to practice with that weapon, he has to provide his own ammo. His gun will be a great deal for someone if his agency ever decides to trade them in...
So, all of this in context, I'm not surprised that we haven't heard a lot of complaints about .357 SIG failures from LEO -- cops aren't shooting a lot, nowadays. They're probably shooting them LESS than you're shooting yours!
If my summary of current LEO usage is even partially true, and I think it is, that makes the S&W fiasco even more worthy of attention, but also explains why (if wear will ever be an issue) many agencies using .357 SIG Glocks haven't complained, yet.
Last edited:
Deaf Smith
New member
Walt,
LEO organizations have been using the .357 Sig for many years. It is not a new cartridge nor just lately been adopted.
All faults, and assets, have been known for years. Been in LEO use since 1991.
Deaf
LEO organizations have been using the .357 Sig for many years. It is not a new cartridge nor just lately been adopted.
All faults, and assets, have been known for years. Been in LEO use since 1991.
Deaf
Walt Sherrill
New member
You keep ignoring the point that I'm making: that the .357 SIG round isn't just a rebundled .40 -- all the evidence seems to suggest it's similar, but different. And in the case of the S&W M&P, too different.
I don't think the .357 SIG has been in use by LEO agencies since 1991:
I don't think the LEO market has really fallen all over itself to get .357 SIGs, but some units do use them -- because it offers a more powerful round in a smaller-gripped weapon. (Glock had a similar experience with the Glock 37 and 38 -- the smaller frame fit more hands. But some of the units that adopted .45 GAP have gone back to .40s and 9mm rounds they had used before.)
I'll say it again: it appears the universe of LEO .357 SIG users isn't very large, and the base upon which judgments are made is relatively small -- given the fact that LEOs typically don't use them much, and most agencies don't have them shoot much.
The Federal government uses SIG 229s in the Coast Guard, and in some FBI, IRS, and Treasury applications, but these are relatively recent acquisitions.
In this part of the world, police departments and agencies seem to change their weapons every 4-5 years. (They get such sweetheart deals from the gunmakers, it's cheaper to swap out every couple of years than to stick with a given model.)
I don't think the .357 SIG has been in use by LEO agencies since 1991:
- The SIG 229, the first gun designed to shoot the round wasn't brought out until 1992, and the first Glock 31 or 32 wasn't introduced until 1997.
I don't think the LEO market has really fallen all over itself to get .357 SIGs, but some units do use them -- because it offers a more powerful round in a smaller-gripped weapon. (Glock had a similar experience with the Glock 37 and 38 -- the smaller frame fit more hands. But some of the units that adopted .45 GAP have gone back to .40s and 9mm rounds they had used before.)
I'll say it again: it appears the universe of LEO .357 SIG users isn't very large, and the base upon which judgments are made is relatively small -- given the fact that LEOs typically don't use them much, and most agencies don't have them shoot much.
The Federal government uses SIG 229s in the Coast Guard, and in some FBI, IRS, and Treasury applications, but these are relatively recent acquisitions.
In this part of the world, police departments and agencies seem to change their weapons every 4-5 years. (They get such sweetheart deals from the gunmakers, it's cheaper to swap out every couple of years than to stick with a given model.)