Quoted: I guess I'm SOL when it comes to my Walther P99 because it won't feed 147 grain 9mm rounds.

The excellent CCI Gold Dot 124 Gn, CCI Gold Dot 124Gn +P, Black Hills 124Gn, Black Hills 124Gn +P, & Winchester Ranger 127Gn +P+ would all offer acceptable terminal ballistics.

Quoted: Well Troy I guess I'm SOL when it comes to my Walther P99 because it won't feed 147 grain 9mm rounds...  So your argument that the 147 grain bullet is the prefered choice over a .357 Sig doesn't hold water if the bullet you are proposing doesn't function in all 9mm handguns.

Sounds like a problem with your Walther to me...

Just because YOUR handgun won't function with the round doesn't mean Troy's argument is wrong.  It just means your Walther is flawed.

I've shot PLENTY of 127 +p+ and 147gr 9mm through my USPc with zero problems.  I've also shot plenty of .357 Sig through a USPc .357 with no problems.  If I had to grab one for defensive use, it would be the 9mm.

That said, I carry a .357 Glock 33 right now, because I bought it before I knew better, and I can't afford another barrel for it.  Bullet setback IS an issue.  I have a few BOXES of .357 ammo that's worthless, because the bullets have been setback due to rechambering the same round.  I finally stopped clearing my weapon at night, because I couldn't afford to waste expensive defensive ammo in such a manner.

No the problem is not with the Walther, it is with the ammunition in which the bullet is seated out too far to reliably feed in all 9mm pistols.  Ever wonder why there was so much 147 grain Gold Dot at gunshows so cheap?  It was purchased by police departments thinking it was the wonder bullet only to find out there were a high level of malfunctions due to it.  I know, I picked up half a case of the worthless shit.  I fianlly ran it through a 9mm carbine.

I'm sure you would have no trouble getting rid of your G33 in trade.  When I worked in a gunshop there were a handful of Glocks that never came back in trade - G32, G33, G29... and others that we always had used in stock, G22, G23, G17, G19, G26, G27.  So if you think it is such a piece of shit, by all means trade it in.

Hell I might even consider trading barrels from my G27 with you.  I would have bought a G33, but we never got one of those in used.  I have wanted a G33 barrel for it.  Let me sleep on it.

Quoted: So if you think it is such a piece of shit, by all means trade it in.

Hey, I have a great idea!  Why don't you put words in my mouth!

I never said is was a piece of shit.  I said I wouldn't have bought it had I known better.  That was referring to my other comments in this thread about the problems with the ammunition and that 9mm +p+ could achieve the same levels of performance.

Hell I might even consider trading barrels from my G27 with you.  I would have bought a G33, but we never got one of those in used.  I have wanted a G33 barrel for it.  Let me sleep on it.

Sleep on it all you want.  I don't sell guns and I don't trade them.  I would rather buy a barrel (in 9mm, not .40) and have 2 calibers than trade for what would probably be a third-hand weapon.

BTW, I disagree with your statement about most 9mm handguns not being able to chamber the 147gr being the cause for "so much 147 grain Gold Dot at gunshows so cheap".  I've fired 147gr through Sigs, Glocks, HKs and a 1911, none of which had a single problem with the ammo.  Again, you should check your Walther.  If it can't handle SAAMI spec ammo, there's a problem.  And it's not with the ammo.

Your shop also probably didn't get many used G33's because not many were sold, compared to the other Glocks.  They just aren't a hot selling weapon.

But, seeing how you know all about the .357Sig vs the 9mm vs the .40, and nobody else is right, I'm not going to waste my time responding to your drivel anymore.  It's rather useless to try to point out what most ballisticians would consider to be BS in your arguments when you won't listen.

Have fun with your .357.  Hope it doesn't turn into a handgrenade on you.

Well I've never had a single problem feeding 115 grain or 124 grain ammo through my Walther, so I see no need to get rid of it or address a problem which does not exist.

And BigD, we sold an assload of Glock 32s and 33s, not as many as we sold 19, 23, 26 and 27s, but enough that one within the two year period I worked in the shop should have come back if the round was so deficient.  Want an idea of the volume of sales done from this shop?  Close to 40,000 firearms in two years and one of the largest Glock dealers in the Northeast.  So I think I can speak pretty plainly regarding the market in this region.

Not a single one of you has addressed the issue of inherent accuracy that the .357 Sig round offers over the 9mm.  Does that not fit into your ballistic equations?  If you say that the 147 grain 9mm hits as hard as the 357 Sig round I'll buy into that.  Now is it as accurate?  My experience says not it is not.  Maybe that is not an issue for you.

Does the 357 Sig recoil more?  Yup, sure does.  Which leads me to wonder the following.  If a 124 grain +p+ fired from a Glock 26 imparts the same force as a Corbon 357 Sig from a Glock 33, why should it recoil so much more?  The bullets weigh roughly the same, they must be traveling at a similar velocity (last time I took physics energy was a function of mass and speed), where does the extra recoil come from?  The guns have the same length barrel, virtually identical frames, weight, etc.

And in case anybody missed it from far earlier in the thread, I am 9mm diehard.  You just have to prove to me that the 147 grain, or any other 9mm load, outperforms the 357 Sig in ALL regards.  I don't believe it does.  If I had a choice between grabbing a 9mm, a .40, .45 or .357, I'm grabbing a 9mm.  I still can appreciate the other guns for their virtues.

Excellent point Troy, and well taken.  Maybe the advantage of the 357 is in the hands of a marksman they make 10 out of 10 hits at 100 yards instead of 8 or 9.  I noticed a 2 to 3 inch difference in the groups from a 19 and a 32 out of a rest/vise.  Anyway, thanks for the info.  Just curious, can you explain why the 33 recoils more than the 26 assuming comparable performance loads?

Quoted: I noticed a 2 to 3 inch difference in the groups from a 19 and a 32 out of a rest/vise. I would wonder about the ammo. Was only one brand used? Was it the ammo the 32 liked best? My 32 seemed to do damn good last weekend, certainly as good as my 30 or any 17 or 19.{/blue] Anyway, thanks for the info.  Just curious, can you explain why the 33 recoils more than the 26 assuming comparable performance loads? There's 9mm doing 1300-1400/fps?

Bob, with the exception of a box of 357 Sig Corbon that was given to me, my carry loads are always Speer Golddot, no matter the calibre or firearm.

With reference to the recoil between the 26 and 33, my question was this, and if I wasn't clear in how I asked it I apologize - I'm not a ballistics expert.

If a 124 grain 9mm +p+ mirrors the performance of the 125 grain 357 Sig, and the 357 Sig offers no ballistic advantage, I want to know why the Glock 33 recoils so much more than the Glock 26 when firing these respective loads.  The extra recoil was one of the negatives listed for the 357 Sig round.

Now I'm no physicist, but I did get an A in the course in college.  From what I am able to recall, the force (or in this case what we would call the energy or terminal ballistics) of a round would be a function of bullet weight and velocity.  In order for the 9mm +p+ to have the same force of impact as the 357 Sig, it would need to be traveling at the same speed.  As the difference is not found in the 1 grain differential in bullet weight, the advantage of the +p+ round over a standard round is the velocity.  The velocity for bullets of 124 grain and 125 grain of roughly identical dimensions, fired from equal length barrels, would be achieved by nearly identical powder loads.  I can see no other way in which bullets that were nearly identical could impart the same force on impact unless they were traveling at the same velocity.

If we all work on the understanding that the firearms weigh the same, and the barrels are of equal length, than in order for the bullets to mirror themselves in performance they must impart nearly identical recoil.  That is basic physics.  It does not make one round superior to the other, it simply eliminates one of the arguments that 357 Sig offers no advantages, but offers the disadvantage of extra recoil with no increase in performance.

Either the 9mm +p+ round behaves just like the 357 Sig round in every respect, or it does not offer the same performance, the facts speak for themselves.  Standard 115 and 124 grain 9mm loads may recoil less than a 357 Sig, but they will not perform the same.  The 147 grain may mirror the 357 Sig by using a larger bullet traveling at a slower speed, thereby balancing the mass*velocity=energy equation, but once again, to me the 147 grain is a specialty round.  How does it stack up against the 357 Sig Corbon which is like a 357 Sig +p round?

Thanks Troy!