Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/2/2005 4:26:43 PM EDT
I have been looking at getting a back-up gun in either 40cal or 357sig. I have read different articles but still have questions. What are the pros/cons of each caliber and is one better than the other? I have shot both but on different platforms, i.e. 40cal: XD40, Walther and Sig p226 and 357sig: Tuarus revolver. The gun that I am currently considering is a Sig P229R. Any info would be great. Chances are I will get the P229R in 40cal and eventually buy a 357sig barrel.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 8:15:11 PM EDT
I'd get the .357 Sig, personally, it seems to be less sensitive to shorter barrels than the .40 S&W. Remember, the 229's barrel doesn't quite make 4", which technically puts it into the "short barrel" category; and the .40 seems to lose a lot of OOMPH when you launch it through a short tube.

Of course, the .357 has lots of flash and blast in 4+" barrels, so the fireball should be pretty spectacular out of the P229.

I personally don't consider the 229 platform suitable for a "backup" gun - unless you're talking about a concealable off-duty gun that'll be your defacto primary while you carry it. Reason I say this is the 229 in .40/.357 is VERY heavy and wide; it's not really suitable for ankle carry, and it will add A LOT of weight to the belt if you try to carry it off-side from your primary. Just for grins, what is your primary anyway?

If you're dead set on Sig, I think the P239 family makes a better backup. Still to heavy in .40/.357 for the ankle, but it's flat enough to conceal fairly well in a "vest" holster on the straps of your body armor.

Regards,

Kevin

Link Posted: 8/3/2005 4:05:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By kjdoski:
I'd get the .357 Sig, personally, it seems to be less sensitive to shorter barrels than the .40 S&W. Remember, the 229's barrel doesn't quite make 4", which technically puts it into the "short barrel" category; and the .40 seems to lose a lot of OOMPH when you launch it through a short tube.

Of course, the .357 has lots of flash and blast in 4+" barrels, so the fireball should be pretty spectacular out of the P229.

I personally don't consider the 229 platform suitable for a "backup" gun - unless you're talking about a concealable off-duty gun that'll be your defacto primary while you carry it. Reason I say this is the 229 in .40/.357 is VERY heavy and wide; it's not really suitable for ankle carry, and it will add A LOT of weight to the belt if you try to carry it off-side from your primary. Just for grins, what is your primary anyway?

If you're dead set on Sig, I think the P239 family makes a better backup. Still to heavy in .40/.357 for the ankle, but it's flat enough to conceal fairly well in a "vest" holster on the straps of your body armor.

Regards,

Kevin




The P229 would my concealable off-duty primary gun.
Link Posted: 8/3/2005 5:12:30 PM EDT
IMO the only advantage of the 40cal is cheaper ammo.
Link Posted: 8/3/2005 5:48:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/3/2005 6:19:04 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/3/2005 8:57:17 PM EDT
I am in the Coast Guard we have switched to the P226 and P229 DAK's. The weight of either is a non-issue. After all the trials and checking natural point of aim, the P229R fits me just fine. So my only delema is Caliber. I think I will get the P229R in .40. Yes, it will be a different caliber than all my others. If they made the Sig 45cal's with the milled slide in the P229R platform I'd be all over it, but they don't, plus the CG is carrying .40. So for me the .40 will work out in two ways: be able to practice when ever I want with the gun I have to qualify with and the P229R is a nice, solid, accurate platform (P229 made specifically to handle 357sig/.40) for CC and home defense. Thanks to all that added to this thread.

V/R

JB
Link Posted: 8/14/2005 11:06:18 PM EDT
From a full-time LEO...highly recommend the Sig P226 as duty gun and P239 as backup/off duty...my personal preference is 357 Sig...but .40 is also available in both guns...knockdown is a non-issue....shot placement, shot placement, shot placement...FWIW
Link Posted: 8/15/2005 12:58:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Gary-G23:
IMO the only advantage of the 40cal is cheaper ammo.



Umm... I cant think of any reason to get a .357 sig over a .40, not a one. I dont see .357 Sig haveing any REAL WORLD USEFULL advantages at all.
Link Posted: 8/15/2005 9:04:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DevL:

Originally Posted By Gary-G23:
IMO the only advantage of the 40cal is cheaper ammo.



Umm... I cant think of any reason to get a .357 sig over a .40, not a one. I dont see .357 Sig haveing any REAL WORLD USEFULL advantages at all.



Shoot a windshield with both and tell me what happens.
Link Posted: 8/15/2005 10:44:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By drew5337:

Originally Posted By DevL:

Originally Posted By Gary-G23:
IMO the only advantage of the 40cal is cheaper ammo.



Umm... I cant think of any reason to get a .357 sig over a .40, not a one. I dont see .357 Sig haveing any REAL WORLD USEFULL advantages at all.



Shoot a windshield with both and tell me what happens.



Depends on the ammo used. There is plenty of .40 that penetrates windsheilds and still gets adequate penetration.
Top Top