Quote:
|
There is a very good argument to be made for the .357 in a carbine, from a performance/cost perspective, IF you handload.
|
Not.
Quote:
|
First, the .357 Sig cartridge case is based on the .40 S&W and uses a 9mm (.355") bullet. .40 S&W cases are as plentiful as dirt at most shooting ranges and are also easy/cheap to buy. 9mm bullets are in every handloading catalog and store that carries loading supplies.
|
From a cost standpoint, 55gr FMJ component bullets are cheaper than jacketed 9mm of any weight. Lead and copper are expensive. Twice as much or more are needed to make the .355 pistol bullets.
Quote:
|
When necked down to .357 Sig, the .40 S&W case ends up a hair shorter than a factory .357 Sig case. Normally, straight-walled, auto handgun cartridges (9mm, 40 S&W, 10mm, .45acp, etc.) headspace on the case mouth and brass that is too short tends to be inaccurate. HOWEVER, since the .357 Sig headspaces on the shoulder (and not the case mouth), this creates no problems.
|
The .357 SIG headspaces on the case mouth. That is what my Speer #13 says, and a couple other manuals, too ...... Not only will the headspace be wrong, but making the already short neck even shorter will not leave a whole lot to grip the bullet .... PARTICULARLY if you use the shorter bullets (you stated cost was a factor, and shorter=lighter=cheaper): the ogive (curved portion of the bullet) begins sooner ..... not much area for gripping the bullet is a recipe for bullet set-back, and bullet set-back in a tiny cased high pressure round like the SIG can make for an exciting trip to Splodeyville: Ka-Boom!
There's a reason there are none out there: It's a dumb idea with no upside, and lotsa liability issues waiting to happen.....