[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 357 sig hate (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 3/6/2013 7:40:41 AM EDT
|
Does anyone have any personal experience with a handgun falling apart from too many rounds through it? I get so tired of reading how the 357 Sig will "batter a frame" but isn't any better than a +p+ 9mm. So which is it? It's no more powerful than 9mm or it is so powerful your gun falls apart after 1k rounds.
I'm asking if anyone has personally seen a gun chambered in 357 Sig shot to crap or "battered" and after how many rounds. |
|
it was only an issue (same with .40 cal) when the guns were built off of 9mm frames. It's why Glock went to 3 pins, its why Sig went to stainless slides. A proper built gun will not have an issue when shooting the caliber its designed for.
BTW, .357 Sig is a crazy round for the damage it inflicts. |
|
Had a 229, and I loved it. My friend would sell me reloads for cheap, but diabetes made him go blind and I couldn't trust the loads anymore. That's when I discovered that shit cost $30 a box. It takes a lot of practice to be good with a handgun and .357 Sig is really expensive to practice with. For the record I shot the shit out of that 229 and no damages. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
The pressure wave makes it fun to shoot and I'm sure if I didn't hit anyone coming down the hallway the vortex cannon would have their bell ringing 
I have had a case head separation on a bullet that was chambered twice.Coincidence? I dunno,but I'm mindful of that now. 
|
|
Quoted:
My only complaint about .357Sig is that it is more of a pain to reload that other handgun rounds.
If I think of it as a tiny rifle round, it gets easier.  I loved my P226 in it, reloading got to be a pain but the sweet sound it made when i pulled the trigger was music to my ears |
|
Quoted:
I don't hate it... it just kinda had it's niche taken away by ammo development in .40 and 9mm. You can get almost the same ballistics in a 135gr .40 load, with the option of using much heavier bullets. A little off topic, but who makes a 135gr 40? The only ones I have ever seen were hst and they were not loaded hot at all. 1100 fps if I recall. |
|
Quoted:
The pressure wave makes it fun to shoot and I'm sure if I didn't hit anyone coming down the hallway the vortex cannon would have their bell ringing
I have had a case head separation on a bullet that was chambered twice.Coincidence? I dunno,but I'm mindful of that now. http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/kerpow/separate.jpg Interesting. Still wasn't a gun failure though
|
|
I have a .357 Sig barrel for my 220. Makes an impressive fireball and noise and my friends get a kick out of it. One mag through it is usually enough before I switch back to .45ACP. Also have a .400 Cor-Bon barrel, which is an even harder to find caliber with a more dubious purpose. The .400 also has an impressive fireball/pressure wave. /TCP |
|
I was issued a 229 in .357 and carried it for several years, during which I participated in a fairly intense training/qualification regimen. I was shooting between 1500-3000 rounds a month. No failures of round or weapons system. I never was able to observe terminal results.
My only problem with the round itself is it doesn't do anything appreciably better than other rounds with fewer drawbacks, specifically muzzle report, muzzle rise and muzzle blast. It is still a pistol round. I can get more 9mm on target, faster with higher hit probability. It is fun for clearing out indoor ranges though. MP-5 in .357 Sig will really get the attention of bystanders. |
|
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate.
The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. |
|
I converted my .40 Glock to .357 Sig, and primarily shoot .357 now because it's pretty much a laser beam.
Both of the metal pins that press through the frame and retain the trigger group snapped in half and went flying. They were 15 years old and have since been replaced. Not sure how much shooting .357 contributed. |
|
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? Lol really? |
|
Quoted:
I converted my .40 Glock to .357 Sig, and primarily shoot .357 now because it's pretty much a laser beam. Both of the metal pins that press through the frame and retain the trigger group snapped in half and went flying. They were 15 years old and have since been replaced. Not sure how much shooting .357 contributed. its awesome for 100 + |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? Your stupid comparison is stupid. Try comparing pistol rounds, which after all what this thread is about. In handgun rounds your ft/lbs of energy stat doesnt mean a damn thing. All that matters is the amount of tissue crushed by the actual bullet. Penetration and expansion. When one reads and realizes that standard pressure 9mms offer the same amount as .357sig without a reduction in capacity, and with a reduction in muzzle blast, flash, and recoil it makes it an easy choice. Its like me saying the U-2 sucks donkey dick because it doesnt go mach 2. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? Lol really? 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? Your stupid comparison is stupid. Try comparing pistol rounds, which after all what this thread is about. In handgun rounds your ft/lbs of energy stat doesnt mean a damn thing. All that matters is the amount of tissue crushed by the actual bullet. Penetration and expansion. When one reads and realizes that standard pressure 9mms offer the same amount as .357sig without a reduction in capacity, and with a reduction in muzzle blast, flash, and recoil it makes it an easy choice. Its like me saying the U-2 sucks donkey dick because it doesnt go mach 2. If that were true .357 magnum would have no advantage over .38 special. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? Your stupid comparison is stupid. Try comparing pistol rounds, which after all what this thread is about. In handgun rounds your ft/lbs of energy stat doesnt mean a damn thing. All that matters is the amount of tissue crushed by the actual bullet. Penetration and expansion. When one reads and realizes that standard pressure 9mms offer the same amount as .357sig without a reduction in capacity, and with a reduction in muzzle blast, flash, and recoil it makes it an easy choice. Its like me saying the U-2 sucks donkey dick because it doesnt go mach 2. If that were true .357 magnum would have no advantage over .38 special. A few people here will argue that that is true,I'm not one of them. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bruce Gray has. If you email him he will elaborate. The last Sig I bought was a P226RDAK in 2007 and it was chambered in .357sig. After 700 rds it looked like my PD trade in P226 in 9mm internally. I sold it to a small town cop who bought into the .357sig hype. I bought into the hype to, but once you overcome the silly belief that external ballistics equals terminal ballistics, you tend to walk away. The external ballistics of the 50 BMG are: 700 gr bullet @ 2978 fps = 13,971 ft-lbf The external ballistics of the 22 short are: 29 gr bullet @ 830 fps = 44 ft-lbf But that is all irrelevant to terminal performance? How does that work? Your stupid comparison is stupid. Try comparing pistol rounds, which after all what this thread is about. In handgun rounds your ft/lbs of energy stat doesnt mean a damn thing. All that matters is the amount of tissue crushed by the actual bullet. Penetration and expansion. When one reads and realizes that standard pressure 9mms offer the same amount as .357sig without a reduction in capacity, and with a reduction in muzzle blast, flash, and recoil it makes it an easy choice. Its like me saying the U-2 sucks donkey dick because it doesnt go mach 2. If that were true .357 magnum would have no advantage over .38 special. +1 The 357sig is a superior caliber, but many people stuck to 9s and 40s and now they feel left out in the cold. Probably the same people that only have 2 pmags and think it is unfair that people with more won't sell them at last years prices. |
|
The 357 Magnum has an enviable reputation for putting BG's down. SIG and Federal got together and came up with a similar solution that works in a semi-auto. I say bully for them, it's a good idea. Even though I own a couple 357 mag revolvers, I don't shoot them much. I went to 44 mag/special a long time ago. However, putting a cartridge with similar ballistics in a semi-auto that absorbs recoil better has got me looking at this round. Particularly a SIG P229.
|
|
Quoted:
I've got a Beretta 96 in .40, and have a passing curiosity of the .357 sig round. If I ever want to run it, I'll need a different pistol, though. .40 cal 92's have a short enough life span as it is. I actually researched this. Barrels are available, but after considering the cost you might as well buy another gun in the caliber. 
|
|
Quoted:
I've got a Beretta 96 in .40, and have a passing curiosity of the .357 sig round. If I ever want to run it, I'll need a different pistol, though. .40 cal 92's have a short enough life span as it is. It may surprise you. I use mine in USPSA production division and lost track on the rd count. |
|
I've got a P226 in .357 Sig. It seems all the people I've ran into that dislike the caliber have never shot it, and just saw the prices on brand new boxes of JHP.
It's a fantastic caliber, easy to handle in a full sized gun like the P226, has 15 round capacity with a +2 extender, and absolutely destroys shit. Go shoot a cantaloupe with a 9mm and a .357 Sig and get back to me on the results. Better yet, try it on some ballistic gelatin. Obvious difference. It's my carry gun and caliber. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've got a Beretta 96 in .40, and have a passing curiosity of the .357 sig round. If I ever want to run it, I'll need a different pistol, though. .40 cal 92's have a short enough life span as it is. It may surprise you. I use mine in USPSA production division and lost track on the rd count. Even an early one with the straight dustcover frame? It's a 96G Centurion to be specific. |