The no love for the 10mm thread gave me a chuckle as a gun forum vet knowing how enthusiastic 10mm fans are. It did however prompt me to start a thread for that most "Rodney Dangerfield" of glock cartridges 357sig.

I definitely feel in the minority for liking this cartridge rather than hating on it.

Reasons for my liking it is that it's debatably  no 2 behind 10mm in terms of horsepower, but does it with bullets of much better sd than hot loaded light 40rounds.

Factory ammo is just about all loaded to full potential.  Any personal defense 357sig load you care to name is still besting the best most expensive LE only +p+ 9mm loads by a wide margin. There are no dumbed down factory loads (as with 40S&W long) however firms like doubletap still manage to push the envelope.

you stay on the 9mm sized frame

I've always had a soft spot for bottlenecked pistol rounds. IME 357 sig is todays 7.62x25tok



Yes ammo costs more and handloading is a bit more involved. But that's why we own more than one glock that shoots cheaper cartridges

edc g32 , plink outdoors g34 soon to add a g31 for deer hunting

I've owned a G31, an OD framed G33, a G33 in black, and just Tuesday I stopped off at a LGS and bought a used Gen 3 G32. I have also previously owned an H&K P2000sk in .357 SIG. I guess you could say that I like the caliber. For me, ammo cost doesn't bother me as all of it (ammo in general) is overpriced anyway if you ask me, so why not spend a bit more and get something with some heat behind it?

 As a sidenote, I also own handguns in 9mm, 10mm, and .45 ACP. My issued pistol for work is a .45 ACP. I just really like the .357 SIG. People say that the round is basically a one trick pony meaning that it only comes in basically one flavor (the overwhelming majority of loads being a 125 grain bullet fired at near-warp speed). I don't see that as a problem because the one thing a super-fast 125 grain JHP was designed to do well is to drop a hostile 2-legged adversary. Lucky me.... That's the one trick that I carry my .357 SIG to accomplish. I don't hunt with it, and I am not a competitive shooter. I carry my pistol for defense against human predators, and I feel confident that the .357 SIG will get the job done quite nicely.

I'm a fan...

What is there not to like?



I originally got a 357 sig barrel for my M&P40FS. Liked it so much, I had to get a barrel for my G22.

I will probably pick up a G23 again soon, and I will get a barrel for it also.



I just like the "2 gun capability" using same parts. Then add in the ability to get a 9mm barrel and what else could you ask for?



Yes ammo cost a little more. But with that logic, then we should all be carrying .22 LR.

How much more do these kick than say a .40S&W?

To me: Not worth comparing.

Interesting

Others may disagree...........................................

Personally, I think the .45 GAP is less popular than the .357 SIG.

I don't own a .357 SIG, but will be getting a conversion barrel for my S&W 1006 in .40 and .357 SIG. I am planning on a Glock 35 and 27, which will be my first .40 pistols (I do have a conversion slide for my Beretta). I could go with .357 SIG barrels for both of them, but I really can't justify it.

I'm lost then.  Are you saying that .40 is comparable to .357sig?  Or the other way around?

I find .40 to be on the verge of objectionable, but am willing to deal with it for the .357 sig ballistics.

I am saying that my opinion and someone elses may differ.

I personally do not think that there is that much difference.



I carry both the .40 or .357 SIG (G22 or M&P40FS) daily, and have no qualms about defending myself with either.

I believe they will both do what needs to be done if the situation arises.



Does the .40 and 357 SIG have more recoil than a 9MM? Yes.

To the point of unmanageable? NO.

Then throw in the guys using 9mm +P+ and it is about the same.



Again, only my opinion.

I converted a Sig 226 from .357 Sig to .40 and then to 9mm.  Same frame and slide, changed barrels (Sig factory .40 barrel and springs) for 357-40 and magazines Bar-Sto conversion barrel and recoil spring for the 9mm.

In the same gun, 357 and 40 recoil about the same.  357 slightly more, but not really noticeable.  In 9mm it is a soft shooter including +p and +p+.

By the way, it was flawless in all three calibers.

 Personally, I find the .40 S&W to have very similar recoil to that of the .357 SIG. If there's a difference, I don't notice it.

LOVE IT

The .357 SIG is a great round.

I had no intention of getting anything in .357 Sig for a long time.  Then I was issued a Sig 229 in .40 S&W and liked the gun as it shot better than our normal duty carry S&W 4006 but still thought it was missing something.  Someone loaned me a .357 Sig barrel to try in it and what a difference.  The accuracy was sooo much better.  The ballistics almost duplicates the most effective round we carried for years (.357 Mag 125 gr HP).  I bought a KKM barrel for my Sig 229 and was very happy with the package.  Now have  others Glock 23 with KKM conversion barrel, Sig 229 with same ,  a Sig 239 in .357 Sig, and a KKM barrel for my Glock 27.
Carry the .357 SIG almost every day for the last 13 years.

.40's still better.

To me, my 357 Sig (G-31) recoils less than the G22.  But the "blast" from the 357 Sig is what I LOVE about the round... just damn fun to shoot.

Personally I love the round! It's fast and gets the job done! Is it much different than .40S&W? I don't feel that it is. I know what ballistics are pretty similar. There's honestly not much more recoil, but I'm shooting two full size Sigs in .357sig and .40S&W.

Considering that the 357 Sig round is running about 5000 PSI above what a .40 or 9mm (35,000 PSI) you can kind of see where the blast is comming from. The 357 Sig would usually recoil less than a .40 S&W because of the bullet weight, all other things being equal. A heavier bullet means more recoil. The most a 357Sig is going to run is about 147 grain. The .40 can go all the way to 180. I don't know the exact formula for computing recoil, but bullet weight is a factor (even powder charge weight is a factor).

BTW, I've found that the 357 Sig is a much more accurate gun than my .40s or 9mms. Maybe it's the bottleneck cartridge, or maybe it's in my head, but i've found it to be MUCH more capable of holding tight groups than the latter two cartridges.

Accuracy?  That's why I bought my M31.  I'd shot 9mm Glocks in the past and seen Taurus copies of the Beretta M92 shoot better.  When I shot a borrowed M31 I was impressed and that added a checkmark to the (maybe I'll get one column.)

The cartridge?  That's another reason why I considered a different gun that my usual 1911's.  I always like the .357 Magnum 125 grain HPs.  Yeah, a lot of folks bad mouth the higher velocity lightweight bullets (and many of them are the same guys cheering about +P and +P+ 9MM ammo).  If high pressure = higher velocity = better performance what's wrong with a .357 SIG?

The last thing that helped me make up my mind was 15 rounds in the magazine (I looked at the SA XD pistols but they only hold 12 in the magazine).

So far I'm happy with it, but I need to shoot it a whole lot more.

Recoil?  Didn't really notice it much.  Part of perceived recoil is how the gun fits your hand.  My Browning BDM 9MM with standard 9MM rounds has a more uncomfortable recoil for me.  

For some reason I'm already wondering if I should get another M31.

EDIT to remove link to a potentially whacko political website.



Had decent information on the 357 SIG round, but rest is just