[jhenry]

The only load in .357 Sig that matches the .357 is the lighter 125 grain offering. This is not what I would want in a woods gun. The revolver will out perform the Glock in every category except for capacity, and the capacity will end up being light and fast not heavy and still fast. For street carry I would choose the Glock. I would choose the revolver for woods use with a heavier slug. As for the capacity issue being a deciding factor, ask yourself this. When the intention is to take a larger game animal, to include bears, with a handgun, do folks take some semi auto or do they take a single shot or revolver? Do you think a dangerous confrontation with wildlife is more likely by sheer chance while hiking or when you are intentionally seeking the animal and trying to kill it. At any rate, does anyone have any information at all regarding the life and death need for a high capacity firearm for hiking? Take it if you wish, probably no harm in it at all, but recognize the trade off you are making in relation to the intended use, which is about nil anyway. Even if the use was against a person you would be wholly unlikely to engage multiple drug crazed thugs in the deep woods on snowshoes. It's too cold for them and getting there is too much like work. They don't like cold or work.