Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 12/31/2005 10:31:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 9:19:58 PM EDT by jonathan1994]
What are your thoughts on the two. 357 Sig has a lot more oomp and would be more likely to expand because of the higher velocity, but .40 is still a bigger hole. Im leaning towards 357 sig though open to others thoughts.

EDIT: Sorry, forgot to say this was for a SMALL concealed carry weapon, not general shooting
Link Posted: 12/31/2005 10:35:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/31/2005 10:37:43 PM EDT by txgp17]
40
Ammo is typically easier to find and cheaper. I've also seen a few problems with bullet set back on 357 SIG cartridges, which is more likely with the 357, since there is less brass gripping it's bullet than a 40 has.

Also, the 357 shines best when it has more barrel to work with. In a short barrel CCW weapon you won't get the full velocity potential that it has. Sure the 40 is slower out of a short barrel too, but in exchange you get more lead.
Link Posted: 12/31/2005 10:56:05 PM EDT
40.

For the same capacity, I prefer the heavier 180 grain projectiles.
Link Posted: 12/31/2005 11:30:45 PM EDT
given the 2 choices i say .40. IMHO both are a solution searching for a problem. there is absolutly nothing wrong with 9mm or .45, and when purchasing ammo, both can be had for a song compared to .357 sig.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 1:42:01 AM EDT
.40 Why?

It will kill them just as dead and the ammo is cheaper and easy to get.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 2:47:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 2:47:21 AM EDT by ALPHAGHOST]
both will work

unfortunately, unless you reload, the .40sw will be slightly cheaper and easier to get

personally, i prefer the .357sig of the two b/c its recoil is not as sharp and it shoots a tad flatter

i went w/ the .45acp/10mm myself
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 11:59:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By netwt12:
given the 2 choices i say .40. IMHO both are a solution searching for a problem. there is absolutly nothing wrong with 9mm or .45, and when purchasing ammo, both can be had for a song compared to .357 sig.



9mm = tiny. .45 = too big for a double stack (for 75% of the population).

.40 = middle road.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 3:12:47 PM EDT
I am glad I am in the other 25%.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:36:10 PM EDT
I just like the .357sig, I got a gun then bought another barrel so I can choose depending on the situation that I think I might need it for.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:38:33 PM EDT
Get both by buying a 40 and getting the drop in barrel in 357 sig. The same mags work generally and only requires a different barrel!
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 6:56:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 6:58:55 PM EDT by mayday]
I'll stick to my Sig P229 & P239 in 357SIG; its the choice of pros like Secret Service & Air Marshals. Its a VERY hard hitting round; at the outdoor range I go to, I use it on steel "popper" targets....well, 357SIG tears them up really well. 9mm, 45ACP and even 40 barelly put marks on the steel targets but the 357SIG actually put about 1/4 deep holes in them. About 50 rounds later the "popper" is totally shredded.

In addition, at 100 yards the 357SIG round is very flat shooting. Just point and aim. Hmmm with 45ACP I have to compensate substantially.

357SIG is also probably the most reliable feeding round for pistols due to its bottle-neck cartridge. Also, the cartridge design allows for full case-support, so no more Kabooms.

I've also done some informal testing using 357SIG CorBon [rated @ 1450 FPS ] and some MagSafe ammo [rated @ 2100FPS ] on baked hams. The damage was out of all proportion for a pistol round. It was like a rifle wound. Not so much for all other calibers.

I'm sure I'll get flamed but I would rather take a hit from a 45ACP than with a 357SIG CorBon @ 1450fps.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 7:02:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 7:04:41 PM EDT by ALPHAGHOST]

Originally Posted By mayday:
I'll stick to my Sig P229 & P239 in 357SIG; its the choice of pros like Secret Service & Air Marshals. Its a VERY hard hitting round; at the outdoor range I go to, I use it on steel "popper" targets....well, 357SIG tears them up really well. 9mm, 45ACP and even 40 barelly put marks on the steel targets but the 357SIG actually put about 1/4 deep holes in them. About 50 rounds later the "popper" is totally shredded.

In addition, at 100 yards the 357SIG round is very flat shooting. Just point and aim. Hmmm with 45ACP I have to compensate substantially.

357SIG is also probably the most reliable feeding round for pistols due to its bottle-neck cartridge. Also, the cartridge design allows for full case-support, so no more Kabooms.

I've also done some informal testing using 357SIG CorBon [rated @ 1450 FPS ] and some MagSafe ammo [rated @ 2100FPS ] on baked hams. The damage was out of all proportion for a pistol round. It was like a rifle wound. Not so much for all other calibers.

I'm sure I'll get flamed but I would rather take a hit from a 45ACP than with a 357SIG CorBon @ 1450fps.



10mm

dont forget though, you have to make sure that those brands expand reliably and have sufficient penetration
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 7:20:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mayday:
...snip... Also, the cartridge design allows for full case-support, so no more Kabooms.

Mayday, you made a lot of good points and I don't find argument with any except this part. "Full case-support" is derived from a properly designed & machined chamber, not the case itself. And no KaBooms?? I don't think you'll ever find handgun (or handgun cartridge) that will eliminate KB's. The 357 brass is desgined to hold a higher standard pressure than 40 brass is, but that in itself doesn't prevent KB's.

I've read where GLOCK 357 chambers are fully supported at the 6 o'clock position, but I haven't plundered with one to verify it. My brother has a GLOCK 33, I think I'll take a closer look (*and a pic) next time he and I cross paths.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 7:33:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Srigs:
Get both by buying a 40 and getting the drop in barrel in 357 sig. The same mags work generally and only requires a different barrel!



Get a SIG 229 with both barrels.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 9:15:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ALPHAGHOST:
both will work

unfortunately, unless you reload, the .40sw will be slightly cheaper and easier to get

personally, i prefer the .357sig of the two b/c its recoil is not as sharp and it shoots a tad flatter

i went w/ the .45acp/10mm myself



I dont care about price. I have other glocks to practice with plus this will be the most likely to save my bacon gun so ammo price is negligible. Once i put a few hundred round through my carry piece I will be happy. I dont plan on reloading .40 or 357 sig. The only calibers i shoot A LOT are 9 and 45

the set back problem is new to me. Thanks for bringing that up, but if im not constantly loading and unloading factory ammo, shouldn't I be ok?

I am trying out a friends 10mm glock 29 right now. I LOVE the caliber and have shot it enough to know it fits my hand and is easy to control, but the gun itself is just a little too big. Its nearly as big as my glock 19 I just got rid of because it was too big. I think 9mm is too weak for a jacket/long shirt carry piece. Any full size pistol is too big for me plus its never cold enough for jackets hardly in MS.

The chamber support question is somethign I have already checked into. The design of the 357 sig DOES allow gun designers to support more of the rear of the chamber because the smaller front of the bullet can go up at a higher angle over the mouth of the barrel. If you look at a 40 glock and a 357 sig glock you will see that only a small amount of the 357sig case is unsupported, while a SCARY amount of the 40 case is unsupported.

Reloading a glock is a bad idea anyway. They have such an oversized chamber that your brass is really getting stretched out after every shot.

I would like to know if anyone has done any tests on these rounds out of 3"-3.5" barrels. I know most hollowpoints have no chance of expanding below 800-900 FPS. A short barreled 40 is very close to this. Add some jeans or a thick jacket to plug the hole and the bullet may not expand at all. Im thinking .357 sig should still get over 1100fps and have a much better chance of expanding. Sure its a smaller hole, but the bullets high sectional desity will do better on bones/thick clothing.

I know its splitting hairs, but im partial towards 357 sig as all the people recommending 40 seem to put cost as main reason

SUMMARY
40 is cheaper.....not important for the primary carry piece
both rounds suffer from short barrels, but i think the extra fps of 357 give it more of a chance to perform better in flesh even though its a smaller hole to start with. (does anyone have the fps of each out of short barrels)
I dont value 100yard performance with a carry piece... thats jail time distance.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 9:46:10 PM EDT
Personally, I think that .40 S&W is better and it is more reliable. 357 Sig rounds are more vulnerable to jams and misfires. Just my 2 cents.
Link Posted: 1/1/2006 10:59:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/1/2006 11:00:22 PM EDT by ALPHAGHOST]


I am trying out a friends 10mm glock 29 right now. I LOVE the caliber and have shot it enough to know it fits my hand and is easy to control, but the gun itself is just a little too big. Its nearly as big as my glock 19 I just got rid of because it was too big. I think 9mm is too weak for a jacket/long shirt carry piece. Any full size pistol is too big for me plus its never cold enough for jackets hardly in MS.


i know what you mean; i work here at my parents convience store in the "less than best neighborhood"--everyone can say "well the 9mm JHPs will do the same job as anyother round..." or whatever, but some of these local BGs are either fit as crap or big as hell and during the winter, they wear LOTS of clothing, including thick jackets--so i went with the .45acp/10mm for PD

Reloading a glock is a bad idea anyway. They have such an oversized chamber that your brass is really getting stretched out after every shot.


i forgot to mention, they say that .357sig is a PITA to reload also

both rounds suffer from short barrels, but i think the extra fps of 357 give it more of a chance to perform better in flesh even though its a smaller hole to start with. (does anyone have the fps of each out of short barrels)

www.handguninfo.com/Archive/www.Pete-357.com/9mm.357.compare.htm--some info, but not sure on velocity stats

I dont value 100yard performance with a carry piece... thats jail time distance.

why i went back to .45acp for CCW/PD at work; 10mm (G29 also, would rather have the G20)--10mm for animals, .45acp for close in humans
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 7:59:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By tonysoprano150:
Personally, I think that .40 S&W is better and it is more reliable. 357 Sig rounds are more vulnerable to jams and misfires. Just my 2 cents.



Riiiight. A straight-walled 40 caliber round is more reliable that a bottle-neck catridge??? Hmmm, not sure were you're getting your info but you have it backwards my friend.

Straight-walled catridges like .40 & 10MM are NOT as reliable feeders as say 9mm which has a slight tapper to the catridge wall. In other words, 9mm is sightly angled to provide excellent feeding. Now the 357SIG has the best design characteristics of ALL the four major pistol defense rounds. Think about it a minute, with the 357SIG you are shoving a 9mm-sized bullet-head into a 40mm hole. It pratically jumps in there. With a 40cal, you are shoving a straight 40cal bullet into a 40cal chamber....much harder to do than with a 357SIG.
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 8:53:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/2/2006 8:53:41 AM EDT by txgp17]
mayday,
You're correct about better feeding, but that comes at a cost of reliable headspacing. Some sources claim the 357 SIG headspaces off the mouth, others the shoulder.

Don't paint me as anti-357 just yet. I'm slowly getting persuaded in this thread that my next handgun will be a GLOCK 31.
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 12:59:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By txgp17:
mayday,
You're correct about better feeding, but that comes at a cost of reliable headspacing. Some sources claim the 357 SIG headspaces off the mouth, others the shoulder.

Don't paint me as anti-357 just yet. I'm slowly getting persuaded in this thread that my next handgun will be a GLOCK 31.



357 sig will headspace off the shoulders like any non rimmed rifle round. The only drawback i have seen to the 357 sig yet other than price is bullet set back. When the round feeds, the tip of the bullet COULD hit in the shoulder of the chamber. From what I can tell, glock doesnt have this trouble as the bullet is genuinely guided towards the .355 section of the chamber as the slide closes. If you use .40 mags instead of .357 mags though, you might have more troubles with set back.
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 4:56:06 PM EDT
Not another damn caliber vs caliber question! Ever one is bios as crap. Imo if you’re going to pack that much powder behind a 9mm you might as well have a longer barrel to use all of it before it escapes out the mussel (as you said it’s going to be small) I would go with something else. Some people dislike the mussel blast of .357sig, it’s never bothered me and if it did I would just find some better ammo with powder better suited to 357 sig.
The best cartridge is the one you like at the range.
When it comes to CCW I went from 357sig to 40 back to sig and then to 9. I realy should have started with 9mm as my first pistol for better first time practice, and I have learned from trolling these boards that experience at the range is way better than anything any one says on the internet. And don’t let any body on this big net tell you that 357sig is inferior to the 40 because it isn’t
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 5:10:10 PM EDT
357Sig is excellant for LE 'cause it'll rip through a car when other calibers fail. I'm a fan of the 357Sig, I have two P229s for it BUT strictly for self defense I'd go with a hot 9mm. Ammo far cheaper for practice, more availability etc etc.
If the issue is strictly between the .40 and the 357Sig I'd go with 357Sig.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:08:32 AM EDT
Very interesting, but I'm going to stick w/ 9mm and 40 S&W. I just shoot those better especially the 9.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:15:18 AM EDT
I would go with .40 over the .357 because the .357 is a pain to reload.

If I can reload it easily and cheaply I will practice more.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:01:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/3/2006 8:03:34 AM EDT by panzersergeant]
I carry a P229 .357 SIG. Yeah the ammo costs more, but if the need to punch through thick clothing or a car door ever arises, I want to be prepared.

Nothing wrong with .40 or even 9mm for that matter; I just prefer the extra zing of the .357.

As always, YMMV.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:32:01 AM EDT
I've said and seen this too many times to list. But here it is for you:

Any of the major pistol calibers perform more than adequately with the proper ammo (9mm, .40S&W., .357SIG, and .45ACP). Pick the one that suits YOU best, listening to somebody's opinion on the internet isn't going to make you a better shot with a .40 than a .357. Go shoot the different guns you are looking at (actual make and model, not just caliber) as they will all be different. Since you already said money isn't an option, pick the one you like best
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 12:54:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jonathan1994:
If you use .40 mags instead of .357 mags though, you might have more troubles with set back.

How are the 40 & 357 mags different? google didn't turn up any info.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 5:43:06 PM EDT
Have the Sig226 40

IMHO get one in 40cal then buy a 357 and 9mm barrel. Try them all out and see which you like best.

If anything use the 9mm for plinking and practice.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:05:48 PM EDT
Thanks all. I have a Glock 33 inbound. The only disadvantages anyone has given for the 357 is set back. For my uses, 40 only has economic reasons.

For many others the abitlity to practice with the same gun and amm seems to put 40 on top.
To me, practice with one small frame glock (9mm) should be close enough plus ill pick up the 33 every now and then to blow the dust out of the chamber.

Now to find some good ammo
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:14:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:04:59 PM EDT
.45acp
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:13:20 PM EDT
small and fast
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:25:05 PM EDT
As a long time shooter and carrier of 357sig. I feel that I need to comment on the bullet set back issue.
When I first got into the round in around 98 I did some issues with bullet setback. I would only try and chamber a round two or three rounds before I shot it. However since around early 99 the ammo companies have learned to crimp the brass below the bullet base. This has solved all the set back issues in my experience.
I do still keep an eye on them. Next to the 10mm the 357 is my favorite ccw round. There is just nothing else you can put in such a small package and still have such power.
It is more expensive, however for me it is well worth the price.
You will love the 33 it is my carry gun about 70% of the time!
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:58:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Mr_Happy1:
Next to the 10mm the 357 is my favorite ccw round.

Link Posted: 1/4/2006 3:14:53 PM EDT
I have not heard much discussion on the .357sig round so I guess I'll ask here.

I like the SIG P239 SAS DAK. Anyone have one of these in .357sig? If I were ever to get a SIG I think I'd get that.
Top Top