Has anyone ever tried to put a 9mm can on a .357 SIG pistol? I have a 226 and I want to get a can for it really badly.
http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/4480/1230vq.jpg
+
http://www.advancedarmament.com/images/fullpic/spyder2_closeup.jpg

No, that would be completely pointless.

And why, pray tell, is that?

Quoted: And why, pray tell, is that?

What the hell is the point of trying to suppress a .357 SIG?  Where are you gonna get the subsonic ammo to do so?

Completely pointless.  drew5337 had it right on the money.

+1

The 357 sig is a loud round and I've never seen subsonic ammo for it. How about just putting the 9mm can on a 9mm.

By the time you make .357 Sig subsonic it will be weaker than 9mm.  Have you ever seen a suppressed .357 magnum auto?  No, you haven't.

Yeah, the whole point of .357 sig is to get 9mm bullets going much faster, so they work better.  Subsonic 9mm 147grn bullets are decent stoppers, as are subsonic 230grn .45acp.  But a .357 would still emit a sonic boom when the bullet exceeded the sound barrier.  It wouldn't be AS loud, but still plenty gunshot sounding.  Get a P220 and a can for it, that would be extremely cool.

I don't know how many of you guys own suppressors, but I have shot a few and I know that most new suppressors, that are of good manufacture, don't require subsonic ammo. The object of a suppressor is to suppress sound, not (keyword) silence it. A good reason to lower the decibels put out is so that the operator can shoot the weapon without needing hearing protection on. It also confuses the opposition as to what they are up against. I posted the question to see if anyone had tried this or not. I didn't post it to hear some forum jockey shoot down my question with an immature response.

I think most folks have not tried based upon the very valid forum jockey responses. The ballistic crack will be pretty loud, and there is no subsonic ammo readily available. Most folks would rather waste their money on something "movie" quiet (or as close as possible) than getting one for comfort, I'd hedge.

I find the concept interesting.

Quoted: I don't know how many of you guys own suppressors, but I have shot a few and I know that most new suppressors, that are of good manufacture, don't require subsonic ammo. The object of a suppressor is to suppress sound, not (keyword) silence it. A good reason to lower the decibels put out is so that the operator can shoot the weapon without needing hearing protection on. It also confuses the opposition as to what they are up against. I posted the question to see if anyone had tried this or not. I didn't post it to hear some forum jockey shoot down my question with an immature response.

Well I've been called a lot of pretty things in my day....

The reason you stated is the only reason I personally would ever want a can for any of my guns.  Alas in MO, it won't happen.  Shooting a .357Sig indoors with no ears on would be permanently damaging to your hearing.  I'd LOVE to have a can for ANY of my pistols, but with a round with so much oomph, its just not going to work too well.  I've shot M16's with both Gemtech and AAC cans, and they were still pretty loud, louder than a 10/22 for sure.  Sorry for the 'immature response'.  If you live in a state where you can get a can, get one and let us know how it goes.  Or call AAC and see what they say.  It would certainly be interesting, but not very quiet, hence the general lack of interest in it.  

Any noise reduction would help...

Quoted: I find the concept interesting.

i find it intereisting to think that the author thinks he is dealing with "rookies"