Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 2/21/2009 4:06:09 PM EDT
I saw some ballistics compared to some other calibers and I noticed that the .357 sig does some devestating damage. I know nobody who owns a gun of this caliber and I was wondering how it shoots and what you guys thought of it.
Thanks for any info!
Link Posted: 2/21/2009 5:16:37 PM EDT
I used to own a Glock 33 which is the subcompact in .357 sig. It is a hot round I think a little more than the .40. Great gun I got rid of it because of the availability and cost of ammo.
The availability is much better now but the cost is still high to shoot.
Link Posted: 2/21/2009 5:16:50 PM EDT
Hi, ive got a Smith/Wesson MP in 357 Sig....

it is hands-down my favorite handgun/caliber combination......

the MP shoots this round with ease, it feels like a souped-up 9mm (which is what it is, really).....I have shot bowling pins, metal plates and even bricks with it....and i can say this round is DEVASTATING.....the ammo is a little harder to find, but for a defense round, the 357 is my choice
Link Posted: 2/21/2009 7:11:09 PM EDT
357 sig is my favorite auto pistol cartridge. I wish CZ made a P-01 in that cartridge and that would be a great pistol. 357 sig definitely has its advantages, and all ammo is expensive now thanks to hoarders and the Obama scare.
Link Posted: 2/21/2009 7:20:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/21/2009 7:21:27 PM EDT by Zhukov]
Link Posted: 2/21/2009 8:07:24 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By offuuu:
I saw some ballistics compared to some other calibers and I noticed that the .357 sig does some devestating damage. I know nobody who owns a gun of this caliber and I was wondering how it shoots and what you guys thought of it.
Thanks for any info!

Where did you get this info? The .357SIG performs about the same as most other calibers like 9mm, .40 and .45, but does so with a lot more expensive ammo and a lot of blast/recoil.


I saw a ballistics gel of the 9mm, .40, .45 and the .357 sig together and the .357sig was slightly biggger than all of them. I know with different bullets and other factors it can differentiate. But I was just inquiring about it. The .40 is my preffered and I reload it and love the .40 and will stick to it. I was just wondering if I would ever get another gun if I would want to get a .357 sig . I have been thinking of getting a .357 magnum but I just thought about the .357 sig.
Say Zhukov, who is that person on your photo (or avatar or whatever it is?)
Link Posted: 2/21/2009 8:26:16 PM EDT
I have one. It is a Sig 229 with a spare 40sw barsto barrel. Bought new and the gun shoots like a dream with both barrels.

Ammo is a pain so i practice mostly with the 40 barrel(strait drop in).

I was lucky at the time, I bought 1000 rounds of speer in 357 sig for 9 bucks a box for practice(down to 400 rounds now). My carry ammo is ranger sxt and it will group 12 shots in a pattern palm sized at 20 yards.
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 7:38:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 7:49:20 AM EDT
I own a SIG 239 in 357sig and i love it.I have done the informal milk jug test years ago with the extreme shock ff and let me tell you i would not want to be a milk jug!This is one of the most accurate handguns i own and still do carry it on occasion when the pm9 feels alittle too small.
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 7:55:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/22/2009 7:56:25 AM EDT by Falar]
Originally Posted By critterkiller:
I own a SIG 239 in 357sig and i love it.I have done the informal milk jug test years ago with the extreme shock ff and let me tell you i would not want to be a milk jug!This is one of the most accurate handguns i own and still do carry it on occasion when the pm9 feels alittle too small.


Extreme shock ammo?

Check out the Box O' Truth's test on that stuff.
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 10:09:23 AM EDT
When using calibrated ballistic gelatin to test the terminal effects of bullets part of the equation is visually-inspecting the shape of the wound profile produced. The shape of a Temporary Stretch Cavity tells us a lot about how a bullet will perform when barriers and obstacles are encountered.

If a TSC is long and cylindrical [football-shaped] rather than short and spherical, it indicates a moderate energy release, slower expanding bullet that will penetrate secondary targets [like arms] without loss of momentum or penetrating ability. A spherical, or round-shaped TSC indicates rapid bullet expansion, rapid energy transfer and shallow penetration. This is what occurs when you overdrive a bullet's construction with high velocity. More is being lost than gained.

The wound profile of these rapid expanding, shallow penetrating handgun bullets is impressive looking to folks that don't understand that penetration is vital, and arguably the key to producing incapacitation––not from "hydrostatic shock" or "ballistic pressure wave" as some companies or researchers would lead you to believe.


This is what separates the two camps:
Light and fast -vs- heavy and slow




.357 Magnum R-P 125gr JHP
.357 Sig Corbon 115gr JHP
.357 Sig W-W Ranger 125gr
.40 S&W Federal 155gr Hydra-Shok
.40 S&W 165gr Speer Gold Dot
9mm Speer 124gr Gold Dot

I believe the above image is a better example of the differences between light and fast [represented by the Corbon 115gr JHP and W-W 125gr Ranger .357 Sig] as opposed to the generic image that is shown in the FAQ link.


IMO, the TSC should not be discounted when evaluating handgun ammunition
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 10:14:47 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 10:24:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By Rampant_Colt:

IMO, the TSC should not be discounted when evaluating handgun ammunition

... except that you'd be disagreeing with the experts (unless the expert is Michael Courtney ).



I pretty much agree with everything Dr Roberts and Fackler have to say on the subject except for this...
The shape produced by the TSC tells us a lot about a particular bullet's performance. You can clearly see that the shallow-penetrating 115gr .357 Sig and 135gr/155gr .40 S&W have a sphere-shaped wound profile. Check them out as compared to a 230gr .45 or 180gr .40 S&W wound profile in gel.
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 10:49:24 AM EDT
I bought a G33 barrel for my G27, but not because I thought it was any better but more for the novelty and to try out .357Sig to get some first hand experience. I find it recoils slightly more than .40SW in the G27/G33 platform. I'd be equally comfortable with either round for self defense.
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 4:32:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By offuuu:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Where did you get this info? The .357SIG performs about the same as most other calibers like 9mm, .40 and .45, but does so with a lot more expensive ammo and a lot of blast/recoil.


I saw a ballistics gel of the 9mm, .40, .45 and the .357 sig together and the .357sig was slightly biggger than all of them. I know with different bullets and other factors it can differentiate. But I was just inquiring about it. The .40 is my preffered and I reload it and love the .40 and will stick to it. I was just wondering if I would ever get another gun if I would want to get a .357 sig . I have been thinking of getting a .357 magnum but I just thought about the .357 sig.
Say Zhukov, who is that person on your photo (or avatar or whatever it is?)

You mean this picture from the FAQ?

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Misc_Images/DocGKR/Handgun_gel_comparison.jpg

I don't see how you can infer that the .357SIG is superior. The point of the pic is that they are all about the same.

The pic is me, of course, taken back in 1945 or so when I was head of STAVKA but before Satlin demoted me. Since my death in 1974, I've been roaming around as a Zombie and eventually became ammo mod here.


Why yes I was referring to that picture from the faq! :) I think it is superior in the since that it is a smaller bullet but can do as much damage as the .40 or .45. My thoughts were that I may one day carry a .357 sig for personal defense in the winter beacause it could probably penetrate winter clothing better than my G23, yet do a good bit of damage. Could I be wrong to make that assumption?
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 9:42:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rampant_Colt:
When using calibrated ballistic gelatin to test the terminal effects of bullets part of the equation is visually-inspecting the shape of the wound profile produced. The shape of a Temporary Stretch Cavity tells us a lot about how a bullet will perform when barriers and obstacles are encountered.

If a TSC is long and cylindrical [football-shaped] rather than short and spherical, it indicates a moderate energy release, slower expanding bullet that will penetrate secondary targets [like arms] without loss of momentum or penetrating ability. A spherical, or round-shaped TSC indicates rapid bullet expansion, rapid energy transfer and shallow penetration. This is what occurs when you overdrive a bullet's construction with high velocity. More is being lost than gained.

The wound profile of these rapid expanding, shallow penetrating handgun bullets is impressive looking to folks that don't understand that penetration is vital, and arguably the key to producing incapacitation––not from "hydrostatic shock" or "ballistic pressure wave" as some companies or researchers would lead you to believe.


This is what separates the two camps:
Light and fast -vs- heavy and slow


http://i43.tinypic.com/x2sz1v.jpg

.357 Magnum R-P 125gr JHP
.357 Sig Corbon 115gr JHP
.357 Sig W-W Ranger 125gr
.40 S&W Federal 155gr Hydra-Shok
.40 S&W 165gr Speer Gold Dot
9mm Speer 124gr Gold Dot

I believe the above image is a better example of the differences between light and fast [represented by the Corbon 115gr JHP and W-W 125gr Ranger .357 Sig] as opposed to the generic image that is shown in the FAQ link.


IMO, the TSC should not be discounted when evaluating handgun ammunition

I have been looking for pictures of gel penetration tests done with FMJ ammo. This is the first that I have seen. Thanks, but would you happen to have any more?

MAX
Link Posted: 2/22/2009 11:15:58 PM EDT
To understand the .357 Sig cartridge, you really need to look at the context in which it was designed. In the early to mid-90's, there wasn't yet a "gold standard JHP or caliber" among LE circles. People could still remember the 1986 FBI massacre in Miami and all the failures *real or imagined* associated with 9x19 ammo. The .40 S&W was in its infancy and JHP technology hadn't yet realized the full potential of this caliber. There were also field reports and "false prophets" that lionized light, high-velocity loads such as the 9x19 "ISP" load or the 115 and 125grn .357 Magnum. With several of the legacy JHP designs velocity was the key to "reasonably reliable" expansion. So, if you had a fast load you had a load that might offer some semblance of reliable expansion. When you consider the above, the .357 Sig made alot of sense. If a Federal 9mm 115grn +P+ Hishok JHP was getting good reviews on the street, along with the +P+ 124grn Hydrashok, then an even faster load seemed like a good idea. Keep in mind, when the .357 Magnum was earning its reputation on the street it was doing so with primative JSP's and JHP's and the relationship between velocity and lethality wasn't yet fully understood. What was understood was that faster was almost always better... Also, the name recognition factor is atleast a small part of this equation. Developing a popular proprietary caliber is a great thing for a firearm and ammo company...

Also, keep in mind that the .357 Sig isn't a .357 at all. Its a .355, the same as a 9x19. The .357 designation is purely a marketing ploy to associate this round with the .357 Magum. When this round was first developed, it was loaded with standard 9x19 .355 JHP's which were not designed to cope with .357 Sig velocity. Thus, you get a 124grn 9mm projectile and a 125grn .357 Sig projectile. The latter being expressly designed to handle the increased velocity. At the same time people figured out that this round needed a specifically designed JHP and couldn't effectively use off the shelf 9mm JHP's, more advanced and relabile bullets started to appear. As JHP technology improved, extreme pressure and velocity were no longer necessary to ensure reliable expansion. Using bullets like the Gold Dot and Ranger T, standard 9x19 loads offer nearly the same peformance as the more abuse/expensive .357 Sig.

While not useless, the .357 Sig is best viewed as a "stop gap" measure. It has certain attributes, like it bottleneck construction and its reputation for penetrating cars/hard objects, but on paper its closer to a +P 9x19mm than a .357 Magnum. Most experts would agree that a human adversary can't detect 100fps worth of difference between two loads....IMO, a 9mm at 1250fps and a .357 Sig at 1350 is the epitomy of "six of one, half a dozen of another".

The .357 Sig is in use by several US LE agencies, including the US Secret Service. The 125grn Gold Dot is by far the most popular duty ammo and its had an outstanding record in actual shootings. Then again, so have various 9mm, .40 and .45 loads. Its a worthy caliber for defensive use, no doubt. However, as the now famous chart illustrates, theres precious little difference between the duty calibers when using quality JHP ammo. One thing is certain, the .357 Sig is more of an "experts" caliber. Improper technique/equipment will only be exacerbated with this round. Also, ammo supply and selection is much more limited. Ammo is expensive, but thats true of all calibers these days.

This caliber has had alot of ballistic research and testing conducted on it. Possibly, more than other duty calibers....Its a proven and reliable manstopper. However, the increased price, recoil, flash and wear/tear on your weapon don't translate into a demonstrable increase in lethality. It has its merits, but IMO its "less likeable" than the other duty calibers. If you want a 9mm, get a 9mm. If you feel like a 9mm with the latest JHP technology isn't sufficient, do some more research. If you still aren't convinced after that, get a .40 S&W.
Link Posted: 2/23/2009 4:52:00 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/23/2009 6:39:57 AM EDT
I used to own a G33 in .357 SIG. Frankly, it kicked too much and had too much blast for me. While it was controllable, I did not enjoy it and went back to the 9mm.
Link Posted: 2/23/2009 9:06:01 AM EDT
I have to G33 and G31..... I love them both and carry the 33 all the time. The ammo is a little $$$$$ but I love the fact that I can drop in a factory barrel and shoot for half price, plus the fact that it can shoot two different round make the gun all that more versatile..... As for it over a .357mag can't help you there. I went the other direction and have several wheels guns in that caliber. Not to get to far off subject but again one gun that can shoot two different calibers = versatile......
Link Posted: 2/24/2009 12:26:42 PM EDT
As for the reputation of the .357sig being a lightning bolt, thats horseshit.

The story that started it all, as related by a gunrag author with less than reliable facts, was bullshit. The .45s used that day hadnt an issue, they werent placed properly. There's also a guy who is about to enter TDJC because he survived not 1, 2, or 3 125gr Speer GDHPs from a a Texas DPS trooper, but 6. All 6 were CoM. It just goes to show pistol rounds arent the best thing for incapacitation.
Link Posted: 2/24/2009 3:22:24 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By offuuu:

Why yes I was referring to that picture from the faq! :) I think it is superior in the since that it is a smaller bullet but can do as much damage as the .40 or .45. My thoughts were that I may one day carry a .357 sig for personal defense in the winter beacause it could probably penetrate winter clothing better than my G23, yet do a good bit of damage. Could I be wrong to make that assumption?

Yeah, that assumption is wrong. All of the recommended bullet in the list pass the FBI test protocol, which includes 4-layer denim. No bullet is going to have a hard time penetrating thick clothing, not a 9mm, not a .40, nor the .357SIG. The real test is whether or not the bullet will open up after going through the clothing, but that's more of a bullet design question rather than a matter of caliber.

The .357SIG's higher velocity does help when it comes to penetrating hard objects, but unless you're planning on shooting through a car door on a routine basis, I wouldn't worry much about it.


Exactly! It seems to be a very common misconception that the FBI denim tests are designed to test how well bullets will penetrate some jean material.
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 3:08:38 AM EDT
Lord. This discussion never ends. Like Zhukov says. Read the sticky on best defensive ammo.

Personally, I prefer a good EFP. It will destroy an M1 Tank or MRAP and kill everybody in it.

Works for me.
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 3:32:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By Rampant_Colt:

IMO, the TSC should not be discounted when evaluating handgun ammunition

... except that you'd be disagreeing with the experts (unless the expert is Michael Courtney ).


Did you catch that post I had a while back outlining how one lab had reached the same conclusions as Fackler/Roberts by studying the TSC back in 70s?
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 10:44:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 53vortec:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By Rampant_Colt:

IMO, the TSC should not be discounted when evaluating handgun ammunition

... except that you'd be disagreeing with the experts (unless the expert is Michael Courtney ).

Did you catch that post I had a while back outlining how one lab had reached the same conclusions as Fackler/Roberts by studying the TSC back in 70s?

Please share.
I'm interested in any study of terminal ballistics
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 11:13:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Rampant_Colt:

Originally Posted By 53vortec:
Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By Rampant_Colt:

IMO, the TSC should not be discounted when evaluating handgun ammunition

... except that you'd be disagreeing with the experts (unless the expert is Michael Courtney ).

Did you catch that post I had a while back outlining how one lab had reached the same conclusions as Fackler/Roberts by studying the TSC back in 70s?

Please share.
I'm interested in any study of terminal ballistics



Here you are:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=5&f=20&t=63335
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 11:57:41 AM EDT
I rented one once. Much more muzzle noise and muzzle flash than a 9mm with simular terminal performance. Seems kinda pointless.
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 3:18:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
The pic is me, of course, taken back in 1945 or so when I was head of STAVKA but before Satlin demoted me. Since my death in 1974, I've been roaming around as a Zombie and eventually became ammo mod here.


I knew the stories of the undead Marshall wondering through the Pale on his way to Odessa to claim "The ammo forum and its moderator frown on your conclusion," were true!

Link Posted: 3/29/2009 3:48:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By StevenH:
I rented one once. Much more muzzle noise and muzzle flash than a 9mm with simular terminal performance. Seems kinda pointless.


You should call the USSS and inform them of your findings...
Link Posted: 3/29/2009 10:15:26 PM EDT
I have both a 9x19 and a 357 sig pistol and I see them as completely different guns because of the caliber. I don't feel outgunned with my CZ P-01, but my Glock 31c offers me a longer range accuracy (Bar-Sto barrel) and ability to take out four legged creatures I don't not believe I have with 9x19. 357 sig is the closest to 357 mag. you can get in a semi-auto and I don't believe anyone will argue against the 357 mag.

All ammo is getting expensive to shoot. It's a conspiracy.
Link Posted: 3/30/2009 2:07:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/30/2009 2:08:32 AM EDT by StevenH]
Originally Posted By Armin_Tanzarian:
Originally Posted By StevenH:
I rented one once. Much more muzzle noise and muzzle flash than a 9mm with simular terminal performance. Seems kinda pointless.


You should call the USSS and inform them of your findings...


I've worked side by side with the secret service on two continents since 1992. They are very good at some of what they do. However small arms selection is not one of their strong points. Their bean counters, like all bean counters, are succeptable to marketing and a slick sales pitch.
Link Posted: 3/30/2009 2:53:25 AM EDT
I used to carry a sig228 in 9mm with +P while it is a very good shooter I used to have reoccurring nightmares of going to rescue our daughter from an attacker pulling the trigger and the bullet falling harmlessly on the floor and the attacker killed my daughter and myself. After buying and shooting a sig229 the nightmares stopped and never returned. is the recoil more? yes slightly more, is there more muzzle flash in the dark? I guess but I was trained to blink at the moment of muzzle flash in order to keep from losing my night vision so its fine with me. say what you want about the .357 Sig but it makes me get a good night sleep and that is all that really matters to me
Link Posted: 3/30/2009 3:42:54 AM EDT
My department dropped .357 Sig from the list of approved calibers, because there weren't enough guys using it to justify maintaining it in inventory. (We are required to use department issued ammo, on and off duty)

I was the last officer with a .357 Sig. It's a good round, and I always considered penetration of barriers like car bodies as a part of my needs.

I never noticed any significant flash, even from my short barrelled Sig P239. Recoil was always snappy, and wear an tear on the weapon was more than 40 or 9mm. But the only reason I no longer carry it as my primary carry round is because of an administrative decision by a bureaucrat.
Link Posted: 3/30/2009 9:02:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By coldair:
I used to carry a sig228 in 9mm with +P while it is a very good shooter I used to have reoccurring nightmares of going to rescue our daughter from an attacker pulling the trigger and the bullet falling harmlessly on the floor and the attacker killed my daughter and myself. After buying and shooting a sig229 the nightmares stopped and never returned. is the recoil more? yes slightly more, is there more muzzle flash in the dark? I guess but I was trained to blink at the moment of muzzle flash in order to keep from losing my night vision so its fine with me. say what you want about the .357 Sig but it makes me get a good night sleep and that is all that really matters to me



+1

Carry what brings confidence. It is nice to know that 357 sig does bring more to the table than other semi-auto cartridges.

Link Posted: 3/30/2009 9:06:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By StevenH:
Originally Posted By Armin_Tanzarian:
Originally Posted By StevenH:
I rented one once. Much more muzzle noise and muzzle flash than a 9mm with simular terminal performance. Seems kinda pointless.


You should call the USSS and inform them of your findings...


I've worked side by side with the secret service on two continents since 1992. They are very good at some of what they do. However small arms selection is not one of their strong points. Their bean counters, like all bean counters, are succeptable to marketing and a slick sales pitch.




I have also worked with the Secret Service, and if the 357 sig did not provide the protection necessary to protect the most powerful man in the world then I am sure a bean counter would get over-ridden.
Link Posted: 3/30/2009 9:14:16 AM EDT
TX DPS sure likes it! They went from the P220 to the P226 in .357sig. I've carried it for the last 8 years and have only shot paper and one charging pig. The pig dropped and the .357sig did it's job well.
Top Top