The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 23, 2002, 05:33 AM   #1
Daren Thompson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1998
Location: Elizabethtown,KY,USA
Posts: 457
How does the .357 Sig compare to .357 Magnum?

Can anyone tell me how the .357 Sig cartrige compare to the .357 Mag? Velocity, energy, ect.?

Thanks
Daren
Daren Thompson is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 06:17 AM   #2
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
ABOUT THE SAME...........

.....up to the 125g bullets, then the 357 SIG is all done.

The 357 Magnum handles weights (based on gun) up to 200g +.

Launch platforms are biggest difference.
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 06:51 AM   #3
12-34hom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 1999
Location: Iowa - northeastern
Posts: 1,779
WeShoot 2 , I see that Barstow is making a 5.5 inch barrel for H&K compacts in 357 sig.

How much of an advantage would there be over my Factory barrel in terms of FPS & M.E.?

The price for a Semi drop in is right at 200.00$ Worth it?

12-34hom.
12-34hom is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 07:07 AM   #4
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
MY OPINION

Not worth it.

If you want more power need different caliber/gun.
The extra length won't ADD anything but velocity (maybe -- testing required) to an already-perfect cartridge.
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 09:31 AM   #5
Jim March
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,321
The .357Sig was an attempt to duplicate the performance of your average .357Mag 125grain personal defense load.

They mostly succeeded, except that there's a very few 125grain JHPs that are faster than the 1,300ish FPS typical in .357Sig.

In a K-Frame or J-Frame size .357Mag wheelgun, you wouldn't want to exceed .357Sig horsepower levels. But in a tough gun like an L-Frame, N-Frame or a Ruger GP100 you can radically exceed (and still control) power levels that'll leave the .357Sig for dead .
__________________
Jim March
Jim March is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 09:45 AM   #6
Marko Kloos
Staff
 
Join Date: January 12, 2000
Location: Enfield, NH
Posts: 5,521
The .357SIG is designed to launch a 125gr bullet, and its ballistics are roughly comparable to .357 Magnum with the same bullet weight. Once you go 158gr or heavier in .357 Magnum, it's a good deal more powerful than .357SIG.

The advantage of the .357SIG over the Magnum is the more efficient case design...the .357SIG does not suffer the same kind of performance hit when launched out of short barrels. The .357 Magnum is really at its best out of 6" barrels, while the .357SIG does just fine out of short barrels. The .357SIG out of a Glock 33 with a 3.4" barrel will still clock close to 1300fps, even though a good inch of that barrel length is really chamber.

So yes, when talking equal bullet weights, the .357SIG and .357 Mag have closely matched ballistics. Heavy bullets in the Magnum give you an FPE edge over the .357SIG. There seems to be a consensus that the 125 grain .357 Magnum is the top manstopper in that caliber, so I'll take the .357SIG in the same bullet weight.
__________________
"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." --A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapon Shops of Isher

the munchkin wrangler.
Marko Kloos is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 09:56 AM   #7
graystar
Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2002
Posts: 92
Left something out

Jim March said:

"The .357Sig was an attempt to duplicate the performance of your average .357Mag 125grain personal defense load. "

This is completely correct. However, there's more to the idea that is significant to know. The attempt was to duplicate this performance in the typical auto carried by LEO; for example, standard size and compact size Glocks. Of course, the idea was to give cops the best stopping power (statisically speaking) while also providing the advantages of the auto; large capacity and quick reloads.

That is the light under which comparisons should be made. To compare 357SIG performance to what .357Mag is ultimately capable of, is simply invalid, as that was not its purpose.

That having been said, the ballistics of the 357SIG are exactly the same as the ballistics of the ammo/revolver combo it was meant to replace. Suffice to say that you would not be at any disadvantage by replacing your typical carry .357Mag revolver with a 357SIG auto.
graystar is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 10:11 AM   #8
Aion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2002
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 277
Divergent topic

How does the .357 SIG compare to the .40 in midsize autos?

- Aion
Aion is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 10:27 AM   #9
Marko Kloos
Staff
 
Join Date: January 12, 2000
Location: Enfield, NH
Posts: 5,521
Quote:
How does the .357 SIG compare to the .40 in midsize autos?
Out of identical frames, i.e. Glock 23 and 32, the .357SIG is louder and has a slightly snappier recoil than the .40.

The .357SIG has the edge in velocity and energy, with the typical .357SIG in 125gr loads generating 1350-ish fps out of a 4" barrel, and well north of 500fpe.

The .40 has the edge in bullet weight and diameter, of course, the average .40 load putting out between 450 and 500fpe. Very zippy .40 loads in 135gr will generate more than 500fpe.
__________________
"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." --A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapon Shops of Isher

the munchkin wrangler.
Marko Kloos is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 10:28 AM   #10
Carbon_15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2001
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 938
There is something i think folks have been missing from the start with the .357sig. One of the reasons the venerable Federal/Remington 125gr SJ-HP has such stellar street results is the bullet design. The scaloped semi-jacketed HP provides dramatic and rapid expansion, and usualy some fragmentation. The SJ-HP is an important part of the equation, that seems to have been forgoten in the .357Sig.
Carbon_15 is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 10:44 AM   #11
C.R.Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 29, 1999
Location: Dewey, AZ
Posts: 12,859
I think kinda like WS2 and Jim March.
My primary carry gun has nearly allways been a K, L or N frame.
To me the .357 Sig is just another 9mm, and a mediocre one at that.

Sam
C.R.Sam is offline  
Old February 23, 2002, 01:58 PM   #12
MK11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2001
Posts: 575
Secret Service and Texas DPS seem to like their mediocre 9mms pretty well.

The .357 Sig is a defense round, pure and simple. The .357 mag is much more versatile. The .357 mag has more horsepower but compare them in barrel lengths that you'd actually carry and the velocity is nearly identical (especially if you include hotter .357 Sigs like ProLoad that make 1,400 fps easily). The .357 Sig is also MUCH, MUCH, MUCH easier to shoot than the 125 grain .357 mag (no slam on .357 mag, I got an SP101 digging into my right hip as I type this). It's loud alright but, uh, so is a revolver. If you want violent expansion instead of penetration, go with the CorBon 115 grain .357 Sig. The .357 Sig is also available in small size guns, something its weaker (at least in commercial loads) older brother the .38 Super is not. Is it worth it? Depends on you. It seems to perform as advertised but whether that's much better than anything else isn't likely to be answered anytime soon.
MK11 is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 03:27 AM   #13
355sigfan
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2000
Posts: 1,388
They mostly succeeded, except that there's a very few 125grain JHPs that are faster than the 1,300ish FPS typical in .357Sig.
END

My chrono has most 357 sig loads in my glock 31 in the 1390 to 1450 range. Maybe a bit nit picky but thats a bit higher than you stated.

The 357 sig is not as versatile as a 357 mag by itself but thats not what it was made for. It was made for defence and not hunting. The bigest reason I prefer the 357 sig over its sister the 40sw is the accuracy. Also as to fragmentation you can get loads in 357 sig from corbon and Trition that fragment like the original 357 mag rounds.

PAT
355sigfan is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 08:31 AM   #14
juliet charley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 1999
Posts: 2,501
Not a great or lousy cartridge, just another choice

Here is perhaps the best succint evaluation of the 357 Sig available. It was posted by DocGKR over Tactical Forums:
Quote:
What does the .357 Sig offer which is not already available? Are we missing something?

We have not observed any better performance with the .357 Sig than with the better 9mm loads; the better .40 S&W loads appear to offer superior performance compared with the .357 Sig. Buford Boone at the FBI Academy and I have compared our respective test data on the .357 Sig--our results are nearly identical. The best .357 Sig load appears to be the 125gr Gold Dot JHP. In both the FBI testing and our assessment, it offers virtually IDENTICAL performance as the 9 mm 124 gr +P Speer Gold Dot JHP in both bare gelatin and through the various intermediate barriers. Likewise, the 9mm 147 gr Winchester Ranger Talon JHP offers similar terminal performance. The best that can be said of the .357 Sig is that it equals the 9mm in terminal performance, although at the price of less ammunition capacity along with greater recoil, muzzle flash, and wear on the weapon. Both the .40 S&W and .45 ACP make larger holes in the target and therefore have the potential to more rapidly incapacitate an aggressive adversary in a lethal force encounter. In addition, the greater mass of the .40 S&W and .45 ACP bullets offer an improved chance of defeating an intervening obstacle while still having enough penetration to reach the vital organs of an armed opponent. I fully agree with Mr. Boone when he writes that the .357 Sig is, “Not a great or lousy cartridge, just another choice.”
Of course, in light of this thread (.357 Magnum versus 357 Sig), we should point out that he only comparing the 357 Sig to other pistol rounds not revolver rounds. We should also note that the 357 Sig cartridge is a "niche" cartridge that no where approaches the versatility of the .357 Magnum.

One final thing that those who use, or are considering the use of the 357 Sig should be aware of what can only be described as a design fault of the 357 Sig round--it is about a tenth of an inch too short for what it wants to do. Its short neck results in a chronic potential setback problem (with a corresponding astronomical increase in chamber pressures)--the neck is not long enough to hold the bullet securely. Right now the cartridge manufacturers are addressing that by gluing the bullet into the neck.

PAT, have you ever noticed that your chrono sure reads fast for rounds you like. As has been pointed out to you numerous time before by me and many others on this board and glocktalk, the only legitimate way to discuss and compare factory ammo is to stick with the more "official" factory published figures rather than those obtained in "backyard chronographs." When comparing a broad range of factory ammunition and many possible different weapons, your "backyard chronograph" figures are somewhere between useless and meaningless.

Last edited by juliet charley; February 24, 2002 at 09:51 AM.
juliet charley is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 10:25 AM   #15
Marko Kloos
Staff
 
Join Date: January 12, 2000
Location: Enfield, NH
Posts: 5,521
I kind of doubt that a JHP travelling 100-200fps faster than a JHP out of a 9mm +P will have "virtually identical" terminal effects, but that's just me.

Also, there's the question of bullet design, as stated earlier. The .357SIG Gold Dot bullet is almost identical to the 124gr .357 Magnum Gold Dot in that it is a shallow, sharp-shouldered ogive, designed to facilitate expansion at high speeds. It doesn't clog up easily. The HPs used in 9mm +P and +P+ loads have narrower and deeper cavities for expansion at the lower 9mm speeds. In other words, the .357SIG HP is designed for those speeds, the 9mm HP is not.

Another argument for the .357SIG over the 9mm +P and +P+ is the fact that the 9mm is stretched to the limits of its design when loaded to such pressures, while the .357SIG was designed for the ground up for it. Some 9mm guns don't take well to a steady diet of high-pressure loads.

An added bonus is the inherent feed reliability of a bottle-necked round, since you're shoving a 9mm peg into a 10mm hole.
__________________
"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." --A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapon Shops of Isher

the munchkin wrangler.
Marko Kloos is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 12:17 PM   #16
DougB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 2, 1999
Posts: 838
Juliet Charley said: "As has been pointed out to you numerous time before by me and many others on this board and glocktalk, the only legitimate way to discuss and compare factory ammo is to stick with the more "official" factory published figures rather than those obtained in "backyard chronographs." When comparing a broad range of factory ammunition and many possible different weapons, your "backyard chronograph" figures are somewhere between useless and meaningless."

I find this to be a pretty incredible quote. I think just the opposite is true. I can't vouch for the validity of any particular results posted on this thread, but if I compare different factory loads by shooting over MY chronograph, from MY guns, on the same day, etc. I have much more confidence in comparing the results than I would trusting stats published by the factory trying to sell each brand of ammo, using test barrels and conditions optimized to make whatever they are selling look its very best against the competition. And of course, we know the factory would never exaggerate performance just because it might greatly increase sales.

Even if a "backyard chronograph" may not be perfectly accurate (and I see no evidence that it isn't), if I shoot two rounds over the SAME chronograph, and shoot enough rounds to get a reasonable sample, I think I'll get a very valid comparison of the cartridges. Of course, the results may not fit with my (or your) pet theory or belief, which can be tough to take - I chronographed a friend's 10mm handloads once and he was greatly disheartened to learn that his loads weren't much better than my .40 S&W factory ammo.

Doug

Last edited by DougB; February 24, 2002 at 01:54 PM.
DougB is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 01:38 PM   #17
Elvis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2001
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 167
This topic has rekindled a smoldering flame. I have been giving serious consideration to carrying a P229 for personal use. Before going any further, let me convey that I have carried quite a few handguns both on and off-duty, and not one has compared with the overall quality of my P229. It is the best damn out-of-the-box handgun I have ever owned. It is more reliable than any revolver I own. In short, I have absolute confidence in that GUN.

Before I bought my P229 I did extensive research on the .40 S&W cartridge. There is no doubt that this round offers considerable advantages over the then ubiquitous 9MM. In fact, I personally believe that but for the 147 W-W Subsonic Talon load, the 9MM would have faded from law enforcement use far sooner. From my actually talking to those who have either used it or who have direct knowledge of its use, I was reassured in selecting that round; however, I knew then as I do now that it is not in the same league as the venerable .45 ACP.

Recently, as chamber failure associated with the .40 S&W round has become more widely known, I have considered buying a .357 Sig barrel. However, and not intending to offend anyone favoring the Sig cartridge, I am not convinced of its utility. Personally I believe that the .40 S&W is a much better defensive round than both the Sig and the .357 Magnum as many law enforcement tests have proven, but having a chamber failure at a very vulnerable time will negate any advantage the .40 S&W might have over its competition. Therefore, I have not as of yet switched my P229 over to the Sig cartridge. But I am still considering the switch; I am just waiting until I feel confident that doing it is logically sound. And reading this thread is helping me make that critical decision.


Until we meetcha again, may God bless you and adios,
E
Elvis is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 01:56 PM   #18
juliet charley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 1999
Posts: 2,501
DougB

I think you are missing the point (or maybe I wasn't clear enough). There are a tremendous number of variables that effect the velocity of a bullet (lot--as in lot number--of the ammunition, the length of the barrel, the particular handgun, weather conditions including ambient temperatures). The figures you obtain for your handgun with that particular lot of ammunition are going to be more accurate for your handgun. The problem is when you try to use the results you obtained for your weapon as a meaningful standard for all handguns of that calibre--it just doesn't work that way. For better or for worse, the factory published ("official") velocities are the only ones that can be used as a "standard" (i.e., that can have significant meaning across the broad spectrum of different shooters and different weapons). Your figures for your gun are good for your gun--they are relatively meaningless for anybody else (probably including many that may be shooting the same type of gun). In other words, your results have no validity beyond your weapon, and they certainly should not be presented as some sort of meaningful standard for everybody else to use.

The other problem with "backyard chronographs" is that it is almost impossible to control any of the numerous variables that can effect effect velocity. Hopefully, a figure obtain under more controlled, laboratory like conditions (that is also to a greater or lesser extent legally binding) would be more accurate for overall comparison purposes and more meaningful in a discussion of this type. You call it "using test barrels and conditions optimized to make whatever they are selling look its very best," I call obtaining figures under contolled conditions to eliminate as many of the variable as possible. (By the way, PAT's figures to which I were referring to are 40 to 100 fps faster than what your are referring to as factory "exagerrated performance."

lendringser -

Whether you "kind of doubt" it or not the same results have been obained independently by two different laboratories doing ballistics work for two different law enforcement agencies. I would hazard a guess the 124-grain 9 mm has just reached the point of diminishing returns as a pistol round without significantly lengthening the case as in the 9x23 (or .357 Magnum). You might want to go over to tacticialforums.com and read the entire thread--just do a search on 357 Sig. It is a good thread.

As for "the inherent feed reliability of a bottle-necked round," I don't think the 357 Sig has proven itself any more reliable than a number of other pistol rounds. In fact, there are a couple of serious drawbacks of the 357 Sig due to its bottleneck (both are design errors and limited specifically to the 357 Sig--not bottleneck rounds in genral): the first is the neck is too short creating a chronic potential setback/explosive self-disassembly problem with round; and the second is that it has the potential to be far more unreliable because basically (without going into a lot of detail) it has to headspace on both the case mouth and the case shoulder (generally not a problem with factory ammo/new brass) as a result of it being designed to headspace on the case mouth instead of the case shoulder.
juliet charley is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 02:50 PM   #19
355sigfan
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2000
Posts: 1,388
PAT, have you ever noticed that your chrono sure reads fast for rounds you like.

I have noticed that the rounds I have tested in service sized guns are faster than published figures based on shorter 4 inch vented test barrel. The 4.5 inch glock gives more velocity than the 229 which is what most of the published figures were based on. ALso I am not the only one to get these figures. Ask any 357 sig shooter. As far as what Doc Glocker says over on the tactical board I could care less.
PAT
355sigfan is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 03:49 PM   #20
juliet charley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 1999
Posts: 2,501
PAT -

They don't use vented barrels for pistol rounds (just for revolver rounds). Four inch is "service length" for the 357 Sig. As for DocGKR (not Doc Glocker), you have never let facts interfere with your opinions, so what's new. He presents some valid points, and his points are well supported.
juliet charley is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 05:12 PM   #21
355sigfan
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2000
Posts: 1,388
DocGKR presents oppinions not facts. Juliet. ALso 4 inches is the compact length not the service lenght. the 4.5 inch glock 31 and the 4.4 inch Sig 226 are service sized handguns. The GLock 32 and sig 229 are mid sized guns. Juliet you never let the facts from real chrono's interfere with your view of reality.
PAT
355sigfan is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 06:01 PM   #22
Ewok_Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2001
Location: Endor
Posts: 1,664
Opinions... facts... I can hardly tell the difference anymore.
__________________
"Death and honor are thought to be the same,
but today I have learned that sometimes they are not."

---------------------
" I like big fat men like you. When they fall they make more noise!
...and sometimes they never get up."
-Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez
Ewok_Guy is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 07:09 PM   #23
Daren Thompson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1998
Location: Elizabethtown,KY,USA
Posts: 457
Wow I didn't relize I stired up a hornets nest but thanks for all the great info!
Daren
Daren Thompson is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 07:28 PM   #24
juliet charley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 1999
Posts: 2,501
Always Daren. There is a small but noisy cadre of 357 Sig "true believers" who cannot accept that it is just another good round (of many), but want everybody else to believe it is the best thing since sliced bread.

The 357 Sig is a good round albeit rather limited in its applications with some drawbacks both relative to its design and its employment. Even though it has been marketed by comparing it to a single .357 Magnum loading (the 125-grain JHP), there is really no comparison as the .357 is a far more powerful and versatile round than the 357 (no decimal point) Sig can ever hope to be.
juliet charley is offline  
Old February 24, 2002, 07:38 PM   #25
355sigfan
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2000
Posts: 1,388
Daren Thompson

The 357 sig matches the 357 mag with defensive ammunition. For hunting the 357 mag enjoy's a slight edge. But if you hunt you need more than a 357 mag anyway. Most of what should be hunted with a 357 mag revolver can also be hunted with a 357sig. There are no real problems with the 357 sig that having your head out of your butt will not fix. Don't chamber the same round over and over again and you will not get set back. Its my view that the 357 sig is the best defenisve auto pistol round currently made.
PAT
355sigfan 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 03:02 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 0.15324 seconds with 7 queries