The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 3, 2012, 02:26 AM   #26
Redhawk5.5+P+
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
Quote:
Personally, I find the 9x23 Winchester a far superior round to either the 357 Sig or the 40 S&W.
What about 9X25?
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old December 3, 2012, 06:13 AM   #27
treg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Posts: 1,020
Isn't barrier penetration more a function of bullet design than caliber?
__________________
"Courage is being scared to death and saddling up anyway." - John Wayne

.44 Special: For those who get it, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.
treg is offline  
Old December 3, 2012, 01:04 PM   #28
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 2,347
Quote:
Isn't barrier penetration more a function of bullet design than caliber?
Yes. But there are a variety of factors that go into it.

In this case early bullets for the .357 Sig tended to break up prematurely as they were essentially bullets designed for the lower velocities of the 9mm, meaning that they were literally bullets built for the 9mm. To take full advantage of the increased velocity and energy of the .357 Sig required that bullets specifically developed for it be used. In some cases specifically built for barrier penetration.

The idea that the .357 Sig was developed specifically for superior barrier penetration is inaccurate and largely driven by gun writers reading backward and internet drivel. The 9mm round was chosen for it because that made sense from an economic and design viewpoint as has been explained earlier.

I like the following tests done by a fella on another forum because they illustrate the variety of factors involved in penetration.

http://intrencik.com/357sig.htm

The tests aren't exhaustive, and had their limitations, but they do help to see the factors involved. Bullet construction, bullet diameter and sectional density, velocity, weight of the bullet, etc. There is a dialectic in their relationship.

Note here that most handgun rounds will easily penetrate auto glass and auto and truck bodies, etc. Numerous tests have shown this as well as daily experience over decades. But if you need to go through a windshield, through a person and into the rear seat or trunk a well designed .357 Sig round may do it better than a 40 or 45. But then, with the right bullet so could the .357 Magnum, 38 Super, 9x23 Winchester, etc. but they don't fit in the same sized gun.

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Old December 3, 2012, 08:07 PM   #29
Rolngthun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 3, 2012
Posts: 4
I shoot and reload the 357 sig. Not because I feel it is better then any other round. Just ended up being what I chose. I do have 9s, 40s, and 45s. Do reload for .45, being a 1911 fan as well.
I do not understand the concern of .001 to .003 difference in size compared to the 357 mag? I am doubting anything shot will know the difference. It is close enough where I have read some who load their 357 sig brass with 357 projectiles. Claiming less problems with set back.
The sig feels to me to have the snap of a 40 and the push of a 45. Could just be my imagination. And I am different than the average guy. Never owned a Glock, and like small primer 45 cases.
Rolngthun is offline  
Old December 3, 2012, 10:29 PM   #30
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,219
Why go with the .355/.356" rather than the .357/.358" for the .357 Sig?

I can't claim my crystal ball has access to what was in the designer's minds, BUT, from a loading/reloading standpoint most of the 125gr .357 bullets have a fair amount exposed lead, fine for a revolver, but prone to giving problems in autos.

And since the .357 Sig was intended to be a one trick pony (and do that trick well), using a 9mm diameter bullet with a profile optimized for autoloader use just makes more sense to me.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 4, 2012, 06:31 AM   #31
thedudeabides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2012
Posts: 981
I bought a barrel for 150 bucks and found that I like how 357 SIG shoots more than 40 in my P229.

Ammo is expensive, but since it's a LEO round, it's not impossible to find.
thedudeabides is offline  
Old December 4, 2012, 07:15 AM   #32
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 35,877
As for why Sig went with .355 barrels instead of .357, I think someone earlier hit it right on the head -- commonality with barrels that they already produced.

Somehow, I sincerely doubt that that extra .002 to .003 diameter for the .357 bullets has any effect at all on bullet performance.



"from a loading/reloading standpoint most of the 125gr .357 bullets have a fair amount exposed lead"

That is but one bullet design for the .357 Magnum. There are many other 125-gr. .357 bullets that don't look like the Remington hollowpoint rounds.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old December 4, 2012, 10:31 AM   #33
CCCLVII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 302
I also find it odd that the 125 grain 357 magnum load that earned the reputation was a semi-jacketed bullet. But Most of the 357 sig rounds I find have little or no exposed lead.

When I originally bought my Glock 33 I thought that I could use my stock pile of 357 caliber bullets to reload the sig. Unfortunately I was wrong. I wish they would have named it the 355 sig. I know I should have done more homework.
__________________
Always looking for a good hunt!
CCCLVII is offline  
Old December 4, 2012, 10:37 AM   #34
kahrguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 1, 2012
Posts: 561
Only reason the 357 sig was based on a .355 bullet is Sig arms the designer and maker did not build 357mag revolvers and they could closely match what was a best performing cartidge, a 125gr 357 mag with what they allready had experence with , the 124gr .355 bullets.
kahrguy is offline  
Old December 4, 2012, 10:59 AM   #35
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 35,877
"I also find it odd that the 125 grain 357 magnum load that earned the reputation was a semi-jacketed bullet. But Most of the 357 sig rounds I find have little or no exposed lead."


Not really odd at all, as the amount of exposed lead really has little to do with it anymore.

The Remington bullet that made the 125-gr.'s reputation was a "Generation 0" bullet, designed in the early 1970s (or earlier) when it was anyone's best guess what jacket, lead, form, and velocity would work well in a given handgun.

It wasn't until post Miami (1986) that manufacturers really started working on bullet designs in a scientific manner, aided with FBI's newly developed penetration and expansion criteria, to design bullets that would actually expand and penetrate consistently.

Those bullets, like the Golden Saber and the Black Talon, were Generation 1 bullets.

The .357 Sig's bullets took advantage of those advances in design to balance bullet design against expected velocity.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old December 5, 2012, 01:05 PM   #36
kahrguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 1, 2012
Posts: 561
Sometimes the latest designs does not allways offer real gains!! Look at what we have around us at what we used on a daily bases. Much of it really ain't better. Lots of hype used telling us it is. Also the best just might be the best sig could to copy the energy and velocity with out a new bullet design just for the 357 sig back back befor 1994. Since then some companies have design a bullet just for the 357 sig.
kahrguy is offline  
Old December 5, 2012, 07:19 PM   #37
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 35,877
If we were talking about a toothbrush or a cake plate that would be one thing.

But this is different because the incredible advances in bullet performance since the late 1980s has been widely reported on, widely examined, and proven time and again in both tests and actual shootings.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old December 5, 2012, 10:24 PM   #38
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 2,347
Thanks to Falcon642 for posting this link...

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_De...BW_5_27_09.pdf

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Old December 5, 2012, 10:49 PM   #39
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 2,347
I want to look at the op again...

Quote:
I know I may be a bit slow here but I recently found out that the 357 sig uses 9mm bullets and not 357 bullets. I am wondering what the reason is. For me half of the fun of the 357 magnum is the bullet verity. Without much looking you can find factory loaded ammo with ammo ranging from 110 grain to 200 grain. I have seen reloads from 90 grains up to 230 grains.

Unfortunately for the 357 sig is limited to 150ish grains at the heavy end.

I am just wondering why they went this route?
Most of this has been answered and answered well I think.

"For me half of the fun of the 357 magnum is the bullet verity."

The .357 Magnum has a much longer case and can handle the extra length of the heavier bullets you mention. Most semi auto rounds are limited in the bullet weights and loads they can handle compared to revolver rounds. The other factor is the bottleneck design of the case. There is less room to properly seat the round than in some straight walled cases. So even had they gone from a 9mm bullet to a true 38 caliber bullet there would still be bullet limitations because of the size of the case and the design.

Another factor, already mentioned, is that wheelguns allow for a wider variety of bullet types than do most semis.

I should point out that a fella likely could resize down some 38 caliber bullets for the .357 Sig if handloading. In handloading for the 38 Super it is possible to use use both 9mm and 38 caliber rounds. Most barrels for the Super these days are .355 rather than the .356 of the original design. But some of that might be undoing a bit what the .357 Sig gets you.

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09198 seconds with 9 queries