I am thinking about the glock 33 as my new carry weapon,but how is the .357sig round compared to the 9mm?

I just purchased a Glock 32 and love it!  I have only been able to get to the range to put about 100 rounds threw it.  I have been using CCI Blazer ammo and it works great.  Compared to the 9mm...it's the big brother!  I thought long a hard before I purchased my model 32 and I think I made the right choice.

Quoted: I just purchased a Glock 32 and love it!  I have only been able to get to the range to put about 100 rounds threw it.  I have been using CCI Blazer ammo and it works great.  Compared to the 9mm...it's the big brother!  I thought long a hard before I purchased my model 32 and I think I made the right choice.

So can you switch the barrel to .40? If so I think I will get one.

Biggest con I can think of is that you can get 40 loads that have almost the same ballistics as 357 SIG and 40 is a more versatile caliber.

I'm going to stay away from it because I reload all my pistol ammo, and the .357 SIG is problematic because of the bottleneck.  It requires lubing the cases, which just isn't worth it.

Pretty early on I moved to the 40S&W and 357SiG. I have a SiGPro with both barrels and have been shooting them for over a year now.

And I'm really thinking about getting rid of it.

I can't really see any value in either the 40S&W or the 357SiG in normal use. I can see the 357SiG in some limited LE applications because of it's superb penetrating powers.

Neither of them are as pleasant to shoot, as accurate or as cost effective as the 45acp. Neither of them are really good candidates for reloading. The 40S&W has far too small of a safety margin related to reloading. Slightly over charging or seating the bullet too deeply or any buildup in the barrel can lead to drastic and distructive overpressures (read Kb!). The 357SiG is a bottlenecked cartridge and againg, prep and loading must be exact with little margin for error.

I can say that the 357SiG was very accurate. But again, not as accurate as the 45acp.

^This from a guy whose handle is a .380?

Seriously, the only advantages I can think of are more muzzle velocity, and more feeding reliability due to the bottleneck.

As for me?  I'll second the motion for a .45ACP 1911 or SIG.

More velocity and feeding reliability would seem to be pretty compelling reasons for the .357 Sig.

As to comparing the .357 Sig to the 9mm, remember what Sig/Federal were trying to achieve.  They wanted to duplicate the performance of the .357 Mag. 125gr JHP ammo as fired from a 4" revolver (approx. 1400 fps).  In this regard, they came very close to achieving their goal.  From a G31, Federal and Remington 125gr ammo clocked about 1380 fps.  You can easily beat that with Corbon loads or by handloading.

I recall that the Rem. 125gr. JHP 357 Magnum is highly regarded for its stopping power.  How does this round compare to 45 ACP?  A comparison of the 357 Sig was made to the 40 S&W on the AR forum and this fascinates me.  The 357 Sig is basically the 125gr 357 Magnum made to fit an autoloader.  Is the 357 Magnum suddenly less effective?  

that is a great part of my arguement. We know that the 45acp can be used in revolver, pistol and rifle. We know that the 357MAG can be used in revolver, pistol and rifle.

So the question is, why design a new caliber that aproaches the performance of the original?

Quoted: So the question is, why design a new caliber that aproaches the performance of the original?

The goal was to duplicate the 125gr JHP 357 Magnum performance (4" barrel) in a more compact magazine fed autoloader. (And didn't I already state this in a previous reply?  Oh well, sometimes you just have to break out the hand puppets for some folks).

Quoted: Quoted: So the question is, why design a new caliber that aproaches the performance of the original? The goal was to duplicate the 125gr JHP 357 Magnum performance (4" barrel) in a more compact magazine fed autoloader.

The 357SiG isn't that much smaller than the 357MAG. Why not just a 357MAG autoloader? Coonan did it.

Well, I'm officially out of the 357SiG and 40S&W round business. I dumped them today. I just couldn't find any reason for an "Almost as good as" when you could have the real thing.

Quoted: The 357SiG isn't that much smaller than the 357MAG. Why not just a 357MAG autoloader? Coonan did it.

I guess that depends on how you define "much smaller." In the vast scheme of things, an extra half inch probably doesn't seem like a lot.  

http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/Wadman2/357M-357SA.jpg

Yup, the late Coonan Arms did indeed produce a 1911 style autoloader chambered for the 357 Magnum.  And what wildly successful handgun it was.  It's basically the same as a Glock 31, right (except for the 15 round double stack magazine)?

Quoted: Quoted: The 357SiG isn't that much smaller than the 357MAG. Why not just a 357MAG autoloader? Coonan did it. I guess that depends on how you define "much smaller." In the vast scheme of things, an extra half inch probably doesn't seem like a lot.   Yup, the late Coonan Arms did indeed produce a 1911 style autoloader chambered for the 357 Magnum.  And what wildly successful handgun it was.  It's basically the same as a Glock 31, right (except for the 15 round double stack magazine)?

What's a GLOCK?

Thanks for all the helpful replies! I still am not sure what one to choose.The .40 sounds good but I want something with a little more punch incase if I ever find myself shooting out of autoglass or thin walls or auto doors.I think the .357Sig might do the job.Maybe I can find a place to try out the Round to see how much it kicks before I buy it.

I have  seen first hand how a .357 sig out penetrates the 9,40, and 45 on auto body and glass. Texas Hiway Patrol has switched to the .357 sig as a duty round for that particular reason. Look at level II ballistic vests. A  9mm bullet at 1400 fps will probably defeat this. Given a choice between 9 or .357 sig, the sig would win. Looking at a 40 cal, I would move to a 45 and go with a glock 30.
just my 2 pesos worth.
Lebrew    

Quoted: Well, I'm officially out of the 357SiG and 40S&W round business. I dumped them today. I just couldn't find any reason for an "Almost as good as" when you could have the real thing.

Too bad you weren't in a position to analyze this issue for EVERY law enforcement department in North America.

And to think, most of them "dumped" the wheelgun when all that was available were highcap 9s.

Now there's a 15 shot autoloader that can deliver .357ish performance without that annoying reload need.

I shoot IDPA with a Glock 27, shot a case of .40 through it.  Love the weapon, love the round.

About the size of a Ruger SP101, but with 11 shots on tap.

Guess I'll sell it.

Thanks for the real world advice.  

Quoted: Quoted: Well, I'm officially out of the 357SiG and 40S&W round business. I dumped them today. I just couldn't find any reason for an "Almost as good as" when you could have the real thing. Too bad you weren't in a position to analyze this issue for EVERY law enforcement department in North America. And to think, most of them "dumped" the wheelgun when all that was available were highcap 9s. Now there's a 15 shot autoloader that can deliver .357ish performance without that annoying reload need. I shoot IDPA with a Glock 27, shot a case of .40 through it.  Love the weapon, love the round. About the size of a Ruger SP101, but with 11 shots on tap. Guess I'll sell it. Thanks for the real world advice.

No problem, you're most welcome.

The initial post asked for impressions of the 357SiG. After a little over a years experience with them I thought I'd be one who might be able to provide some input.

As to the issue of revolver vs pistol, that, like many other things will be a matter of personal choice. I have a herd of pistols and will most likely continue shooting pistols on occassion. But the advantages of the revolver simply outweigh the advantages of a pistol for me, so when practical, that's what I shoot.

As to police and law enforcement agencies choosing the 40S&W or 357SiG, if you look through what I said, I believe I stated that I could see a place for the 357SiG in LE and the military.

Sig_230,

You having had a year's experience with the 357 Sig makes your other statement seem pretty inexplicable.  

Oh, I see.

No need for them "in normal use."  I DID miss that observation.

Guess that rules out the .357mg, .44mag, the entire line of .480Ruger, .455 Supermag, all of Freedom Arms' monstrosities, .45 Super, and anything with a standard capacity of more than 5, right?

Speaking of one of us urging the other to read what has been posted, the guy asked for a comparison of .357 Sig to 9mm.

What's your take on that?

When you study reloading and ballastics, no more potent round exsist which can be concealed in a subcompact gun.

The 357 SIG equals 357 Mag in ballistics.  The Speer Gold Dots are some nice bullets.  But the snap and recoil on 357 sig is a tad more than 40SW.

40SW is a step down.  9mm is a step down.  And more agencies are picking up the 357 sig round.  But it does take a more experienced shooter to really appreciate it.

Recoilwise, 357 sig snaps more than 9mm but equivalent to 40SW.  But it's what you experience.  I like shooting 44 mag in a huge Redhawk and 10mm in a Glock 20.  The key is is you want a deadly defense round, 357 sig is the most effective for its size.

Look at any ballitsics and FPE chart for verification.  The only superior common handgun caliber is 10mm.  They're just a tad thick for easy CCW.

I pack the G32 and G33 and they are great guns.  And you can use 40SW barrels in them as well.  They G33 disappears on you.  It's my summer rig.

And reloading the 357 SIG only requires lube on the case.  Just grab a milk carton, spray some Hornady One Shot SPray lube and roll.  No big deal.  I can grind out 450 rounds of 357 an hour on my Dillon 550.

And this round guards our U.S. President.

Surely it's powerful enough for us!

Carry any of the below.  But if you want a smack down and stay down round in a very concealable package, 357 sig is the best round on the market!

Quoted: Oh, I see. No need for them "in normal use."  I DID miss that observation. Guess that rules out the .357mg, .44mag, the entire line of .480Ruger, .455 Supermag, all of Freedom Arms' monstrosities, .45 Super, and anything with a standard capacity of more than 5, right? Speaking of one of us urging the other to read what has been posted, the guy asked for a comparison of .357 Sig to 9mm. What's your take on that?

Well, I've never seen one of these discussions reach a satisfactory conclusion for all. I hope that this can be accepted as simply a statement of what I personally believe and not meant as a denigration of any one or any caliber.

For most people and most uses I think that the 9mm is about the best possible choice for a pistol shooter. The 9mm is relatively inexpensive and that can translate into increased rounds fired and hopefully, greater proficiency. Even as a carry weapon, I think that the 9mm is a very good choice for the average person.

As to ruling out 357MAG, 44Mag etc., one of the things that I said was that I could not justify either the 40S&W or 357SiG because they duplicated what I already had and that was already available. I happen to think that the 357MAG was a nearly perfect round, one of the greatest calibers of al time.

I think that many rounds are more appropriate for specific tasks. For example, the 44 series (and the 41) are very good choices for some outdoors uses. If I'm going into an area where I might face some of the larger wild animals are found, I'd probably take a 44Mag.

As to the wildcatter calibers, they are and have always been, a sub genre. There are people that really enjoy the 454cassull and the 450SC. In fact, I've been thinking about trying the new 450SC in a 6" revolver. I think that may just be a really neat shooter.

So there it is. I hope that makes my POV clear. It's just that. My point of view. Some may find my reasoning specious, others may find it opens a new line of thought. There's not much more that any of us can ask.

Thank you sig 230 and kpel...jarhead 308....for stating what I have been trying to tell people for such a long time....(so it seems).....even though the 40 DOES HAVE some impressive performance.....AND the sig version of it DOES HAVE a seemingly efficient edge on the 40..........THEY ARE BOTH NOTHING BUT REDUNDANCY ....considering what is already available...effective....and more cost efficient..if not easibly obtainable.......no problem with owning a nine...only because it is cheaper to shoot-play with than a 22 mag.....and in reality...not a bad backup since there are some very compact versions (but 45`s are keeping up).......so then I reaffirm my own reasons for staying with 45...and 10mm........(maybe the 40 guys won`t jump all over me this time..?)

One of the Phamacists I work with is going through the same thing.  He has a wide assortment of hand guns and long guns.  For some reason he seems to think he needs to buy a .357sig barrel for his Glock 23.

Any time you look at a weapon system for defence of your loved ones, you want the best you can get.  All though, it seems we make this harder on our selves than it really is.  When concidering a side-arm you need to clearly state the role that weapon will play.  Keep it simple.  No one weapon will fill every role.  Some will fill more than one role others will not.

If your stated role for this weapon is personal defence, to be carried on your person, then just about any caliber will work as long as it produces 350 Ft Lbs of energy or more, @ 10 feet.  So any thing of 9mm or greater.


9mm is a good cartridge for just about any body.

I believe .40 S&W or .45 ACP is better.

How-ever I carry a Glock 20 10mm, In MHO it is the best Duty sized side arm avalible.

I think the .357 Sig is better than the 9mm.  But I must say that I would buy a .40 S&W over a .357 Sig.  Mainly because of ammo price, reloading cost, & versitility.

If your looking at a multi purpose side arm I would go with a Glock 20.

Wide bullet weight selection, 135 - 200 grains.
fast,   @ 1350 FPS.
hits hard,  @ 650 - 700 Ft Lbs.
Hi-cap Mags,  15 rounds


You can find more powerful handguns...  but they tend to be heavier and / or much bigger.  Often with much more recoil, and fewer rounds on hand.

I have said this before...
you can shoot a bad guy with a .45 @ point blank range, and I can be 100 yards away and shoot the same bad guy with a 10mm.  The 10mm will hit that bad guy with more energy after a 100 yards than your .45 will at point blank range.

10mm is the new King.  Hell, the .357 Mag was 30 years old before it became popular.

The greatest thing about .357SIG, is it's just a barrel change away from .40S&W in most cases, and a 9mm with another barrel, and maybe a spring change. That, and it is a an out and out flat shooting SOB.  Anybody who can't handle the muzzle flip should stick with 9mm, or even a wimpy SIG P230 .380.  It's all about training, and shot placement anyway, right?  

I carry 9mm, .357SIG, .40S&W, and .45ACP all the time, according to how I feel in the morning.  Most of these are SIG classics, 220, 226, 229, 228's, and they all operate the same, so it's easy to train, but I also carry 1911, S&W 627, and a couple of Para P14-45's.

I really like the combination of high Caps (more than 10) and firepower a .357SIG offers, and also it is a lot of pop that can be had in a small P239, Kel-Tec, package.  But for me, I have confidence it will shoot straight, and have the power I need in a defensive situation.

I do agree with 10mm as being a bad-assed round, and if SIG ever makes a P226 or P220 for it, I will add that to my list, but no Gloc-kB for me.

i carry a glock 27 40 cal most of the time.
i change the barrel to 357 sig in the winter time. "why " you ask?---- because the bad guy will have a thick coat on in the winter!
the barrel was $50 from CDNN and works great!

From BIGGUN I do agree with 10mm as being a bad-assed round...

Nice to see some people know power when they see it.

Also from  BIGGUN ...and if SIG ever makes a P226 or P220 for it, I will add that to my list....

I don't think SIG will ever chamber a pistol for the 10mm.  They are smart enough to have seen and learned from Colt, Smith & Wesson, Springfield, and every one else, who tried to do a simple barrel swap from .45 to 10mm.  Most guns just can not hand the power of the 10mm.  It requires more than just a barrel swap...

Again from BIGGUN ...but no Gloc-kB for me.

What the hell is Gloc-kB ?

I ask this because both my brother and I are avid 10mm fans, but more than that, we are Glock fans.  We both carry Glock 20's on a daily bases.

Meant mostly in fun, but it means Glock KaBoom, as in catastophic, immediate, dissasembly, check my fingers, how's my face, failure.
Reference to some of the historic Glock failures, and just tweaking a bit.

And I think the new P220ST frame and slide (all stainless) would handle the 10mm just fine.  That and SIG's supported chamber design.

I would think a 10mm fan would want as many successful manufacturers of weapons chambered in the round as possible?!  Otherwise, it will remain in the *wildcat* or little used, category.

On another bent, Kurt's Kustom .357SIG carbine is the coolest!  It also produces some great velocity, and is a great pistol caliber carbine setup.  Look for it in a future "Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement" issue, and on top of one of my receivers.

I would love to see the 10mm make a come back.  I have been an unwavering fan of the 10mm since 1989 when Colt first anounced plans to bring back the 10mm in the Colt Delta, Delta Elite, & Delta Gold Cup.

I blame the Media ( Gun writers ) for its fall from star-dom.  Those weak-wristed old farts saw the 10mm pushing their beloved .45 of the shelf.  It was only then that the stories came out of frame failures, slide failures, & all of that sort of thing.  It is real funny, but should they have been blaming the cartridge or the handgun maker ?

If you guys like 10mm ballistics from a handgun, you'd love them from a carbine.  I've done some chrono testing with an 11.5" barrel and Nordic3K on the AR forum has tested a 16.5" barrel.