The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 2, 2013, 08:10 PM   #26
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Why isn't this cartridge more popular?
Popular with alot of state and federal folks.

But most civilians are not 'into' guns all that much and thus they stick with 9mm, .38 Spl., and to a lessor extent .40 and .45.

The .357 Sig is my CCW cartridge of choice as for semi-autos. With loads from Double Tap you get true .357 Magnum performance even from the small Glock 33.

I figured why pay $$ for +p+ 9mm that is hard to find when I can get good .357 Sig JHP ammo from most shops and it's more powerful than +p+ 9mm.

But again, most citizens are not into guns. Hence even the .380 and .32 are still popular!

Deaf
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old November 2, 2013, 11:04 PM   #27
ChrisTx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Posts: 147
A department I worked for issued Glock 32s. I think the only ones who liked it were the ones who decided we would carry it. Pointless caliber.
ChrisTx is offline  
Old November 2, 2013, 11:10 PM   #28
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 4,320
Quote:
But again, most citizens are not into guns. Hence even the .380 and .32 are still popular!
I think this is a bit silly. So I carry 9mm because I am not "into guns"? Come on now.

As for the .380, if that's the size you can carry, a gun is better than no gun.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams
TunnelRat is offline  
Old November 2, 2013, 11:35 PM   #29
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 2,423
The way I look it at, a gun that chambers the .357 sig shoots a round that is the same size as a 9mm with more recoil, more flash, while having less capacity. I am in the school of thought that a couple hundred FPS is not going to save my butt. I can put shots on target quicker and with more accuracy with a 9mm than I can with a .357 sig.

It's like the old .308 vs 30-06 argument for hunting. Both rounds at similar distances can accomplish the same exact thing with the same exact results. Sure at longer distances the 30-06 has a slight advantage, as does the .357 sig having a flatter trajectory, but when you are talking about using them both at the same distance, the difference is negligible. If you like the .357 sig that's fine, it's a great round, but 9mm fits my needs better.

Quote:
But again, most citizens are not into guns. Hence even the .380 and .32 are still popular!
So because I often carry a .380, I guess that automatically means I am not into guns.

Last edited by Dragline45; November 2, 2013 at 11:41 PM.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 02:45 AM   #30
BigPoppa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 21, 2008
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 157
It is my winter time EDC in the S&WM&P Full Size with Crimson Trace Laser Grip loaded with Federal 125 gr HST.
BigPoppa is online now  
Old November 3, 2013, 04:07 AM   #31
RX-79G
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 27, 2013
Posts: 1,139
9mm shoots to POA at 100 meters. What's flatter than that for a pistol?
RX-79G is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 05:43 AM   #32
kcub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,017
2 Texas DPS officers had to shoot back at a man in up high in an 18 wheeler cab. One officer used a .45 and they did not penetrate the cab door. The other officer had the then new .357 Sig which got through that steel cab door and ended the fight. Most agencies that use .357 Sig are happy with them.
kcub is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:18 AM   #33
Noreaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 1,322
That is precisely the reason I don't use the 357 Sig for HD, the ability to pass through many barriers. How many car stops do you conduct?
Noreaster is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:36 AM   #34
kcub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,017
That does not mean it goes through people like a hot knife through butter. We're talking 125 grain gold dot hollow points, not FMJ.

I once had a carload of gangbangers roll up on me while I was walking down the sidewalk in Houston. I did not have to shoot but if I did I want .357 Sig hollow points whether it hits glass, steel, or cholo. Ditto if I get carjacked and have to shoot out of my car.
kcub is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 09:18 AM   #35
RBid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 10, 2012
Posts: 1,054
357 Sig

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcub View Post
2 Texas DPS officers had to shoot back at a man in up high in an 18 wheeler cab. One officer used a .45 and they did not penetrate the cab door. The other officer had the then new .357 Sig which got through that steel cab door and ended the fight. Most agencies that use .357 Sig are happy with them.
There are important reasons for standardized testing of ammunition. Vehicle doors are not single pieces, in a uniform shape, etc. They are constructs, with variance inside and out. The .45 may well have hit a cross beam in the door that the .357 Sig missed.

I'm not a ".45 guy", and I don't dislike .357 Sig. I'm simply pointing out that we have to be objective, and consider variables that come into play.

There are MANY questions that come into play when we try to determine which rounds are the best fit for our purpose. Likely context of use is a huge one. As a private citizen, what percentage of encounters are likely to involve shooting through auto material? That's just one of many things for each of us to consider.
RBid is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 09:40 AM   #36
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 4,320
Quote:
I did not have to shoot but if I did I want .357 Sig hollow points whether it hits glass, steel, or cholo. Ditto if I get carjacked and have to shoot out of my car.
When you're talking the same bullet weight, is a 9mm +P really going to be that lacking in comparison? Especially for penetration?
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams
TunnelRat is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 09:46 AM   #37
kgpcr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2005
Posts: 944
I will just keep my .40 and be happy with it. I also have a .357 snubbie I carry and I like that too.
__________________
Colt King Cobra .357 Colt Anaconda .44mag
Springfield Armory .45 Double stack Loaded
XD40 service XD45 Taurus 617 .357mag
Smith M&P 40
kgpcr is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 10:04 AM   #38
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,236
The .357 Sig will penetrate more barrier material but with the same ammo, on human opponents, will expand and stop inside them.

The bullets are designed to do just that and work quite well.

As for more flash and blast, hey all high powered handguns have flash and blast, be it 9mm, .40 S&W, .357 Sig, .45 ACP, .357 magnum...

But as for flash, most high end ammo has flash retardant power.

And blast?

http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml

Table 3. CENTERFIRE PISTOL DATA

.25 ACP 155.0 dB
.32 LONG 152.4 dB
.32 ACP 153.5 dB
.380 157.7 dB
9mm 159.8 dB
.38 S&W 153.5 dB
.38 Spl 156.3 dB
.357 Magnum 164.3 dB
.41 Magnum 163.2 dB
.44 Spl 155.9 dB
.45 ACP 157.0 dB
.45 COLT 154.7 dB

.357 Sig ought to be near the .357 magnum but I doubt more cause there is no flash gap on semi-autos.

But also note the 30-06 in the other table as well as the 12 gauge in 18 inch barrel form.

GIs's shot lots of 06 in WW2 and Korea, and 7.62 Nato since then. I doubt any loss of hearing from firing a few shots in SD.

Deaf
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."

Last edited by Deaf Smith; November 3, 2013 at 10:10 AM.
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 10:21 AM   #39
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 2,423
Quote:
GIs's shot lots of 06 in WW2 and Korea, and 7.62 Nato since then. I doubt any loss of hearing from firing a few shots in SD.
I fired a SINGLE .357 magnum round without hearing protection and have high frequency hearing loss in my left ear as well as permanent tinnitus. Just one shot can cause damage, so several shots certainly will.

My grandfather who was a WW2 vet spent his whole life with severe tinnitus and a big old hearing aid in each year. Even with the hearing aids he could barely hear.

Even today, hearing loss and tinnitus are one of the major disabilities reported by veterans when they return home. Couple tinnitus with PTSD and you have yourself a really tough time.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 11:04 AM   #40
Onward Allusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: IN
Posts: 1,727
Interesting image

Probably been posted before, but since so many newbies....

Aside from 9mm & 50 AE, not much difference between 357 Sig, 40 S&W, & 45 ACP. Maybe we should all carry Desert Eagles!

__________________
"With great power, there must also come great responsibility." - Stan Lee

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
Onward Allusion is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 11:41 AM   #41
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,624
357 Sig

Quote:
Originally Posted by RX-79G View Post
Whether it is true or not, I'm a bit shocked that you've been on internet boards this long and never heard that people believe that 9mm over penetrates, Brian.

It really doesn't matter if it is true or not. If someone believes that, it is going to influence their view of other 9mm diameter rounds. That's what I was getting at.


Did you use some sort of glue with your .357 Sig loads, or have the original set back problems from the small case neck surface area get fixed somehow?
Well, I guess I can't say I've "never" heard it but it's certainly the OPPOSITE of what I typically hear if someone is arguing against 9mm and I don't recall having heard it, certainly not common.

"If someone believes it" it may influence their decision but that doesn't mean we don't question it when we see it, since it isn't true.

In terms of loading the Sig, there are a variety of ways to prevent setback. Note first that properly sized cases solve the problem in most instances. Factory ammo doesn't use any special tricks to prevent setback, it's just made correctly.
A reloader can also use compressed charges to further prevent it.
Lee Factory Crimp die can help if used correctly.

In any case, it's nothing particularly special or difficult.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 06:29 PM   #42
born2climb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragline45
Just one shot can cause damage, so several shots certainly will.
While I agree to an extent, I believe current conditions play a lot in how sound is processed. I have sensitive ears, and wear ear plugs a LOT. I own/operate a tree service, and wear them nearly all day at work. I use them when running a push mower, even a skilsaw. However, I have, on more than one occasion, shot a deer, without hearing protection, and heard the deer fall. My theory is that adrenaline shuts off the hearing circuit to protect it, but that may not be correct. I just know shooting a can will deafen me, while shooting at deer does not.
__________________
Don't invest in idiots....the market's flooded!!!
born2climb is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:15 PM   #43
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 2,423
Quote:
My theory is that adrenaline shuts off the hearing circuit to protect it, but that may not be correct.
Your theory is not correct, and the technical term do describe what is happening is called auditory exclusion. Many times during self defense situations, and even hunting, many people don't remember hearing the shots. However, just because they didn't hear the shots does not mean they did not cause damage to their ears. Hearing loss is cumulative, just because you don't notice the damage right away does not mean damage has not occurred. Anytime you fire a gun, even a .22 pistol, without hearing protection you are causing damage to your ears however miniscule it may be.

Last edited by Dragline45; November 3, 2013 at 08:36 PM.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:21 PM   #44
Noreaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 1,322
There is something to auditory exclusion. I've been in a few firefights and didn't remember or have any perception of injury to the ears but I've shot down a pheasant w/o protection and I had a ringing in my ears afterward.
Noreaster is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:25 PM   #45
born2climb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 140
I'm not going to debate you, Dragline, but I will say that I disagree to some extent, as I know the difference in ears ringing and ears NOT ringing. If the ears are ringing for several minutes, and yet at other times, acute hearing is not lost, SOMETHING was different, call it what you will. And I believe that something protects the hearing on those occasions. (And though you may use different terminology, I figure adrenaline plays a part...)
__________________
Don't invest in idiots....the market's flooded!!!
born2climb is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:27 PM   #46
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 2,423
Quote:
There is something to auditory exclusion. I've been in a few firefights and didn't remember or have any perception of injury to the ears but I've shot down a pheasant w/o protection and I had a ringing in my ears afterward.
That's not to say you did not cause damage even though you did not percieve it. I had this discussion with my ENT (Ear Nose Throat doctor), and he explained that auditory exclusion is 100% mental and does absolutely nothing to protect your ears. There are little microscopic cochlear hair cells in your ears that pick up sound and send signals to your brain. When your ears are exposed to loud noises pressure waves hit these hairs and can damage them and in worse case scenarios kill them. If any of these hairs die that is what causes noise induced tinnitus and hearing loss.

Quote:
I'm not going to debate you, Dragline, but I will say that I disagree to some extent, as I know the difference in ears ringing and ears NOT ringing. If the ears are ringing for several minutes, and yet at other times, acute hearing is not lost, SOMETHING was different, call it what you will. And I believe that something protects the hearing on those occasions. (And though you may use different terminology, I figure adrenaline plays a part...)
You can believe all you want but doctors have proven exactly what you think happens does not occur. If you don't believe me make an appointment with an ENT and they will confirm it for you.

Last edited by Dragline45; November 3, 2013 at 08:32 PM.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:27 PM   #47
thedudeabides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2012
Posts: 989
That's somewhat inaccurate. The stapedius muscle as part of the auditory reflex (above 85 dB) contracts and protects the cochlea from transmission of high intensity sound--but its function is variable across the population and it's uncertain if it actually prevents hearing damage. I'm guessing it mitigates it...

With that said, my 357 SIG P229 was a really loud gun and I hated shooting it at an indoor range.
__________________
OK, so not all plastic guns are bad
thedudeabides is online now  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:31 PM   #48
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 2,423
Quote:
That's somewhat inaccurate. The stapedius muscle as part of the auditory reflex (above 85 dB) contracts and protects the cochlea from transmission of high intensity sound--but its function is variable across the population and it's uncertain if it actually prevents hearing damage. I'm guessing it mitigates it...
Even if that is the case damage still occurs, I am not disputing it mitigates it as I am no doctor, but even when wearing ear plugs you can still cause damage to your ears as they are only rated up to a certain DB level. Point is that whether you notice it or not, shooting a gun without protection will damage your ears every single time no matter how miniscule the damage is.
Dragline45 is offline  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:36 PM   #49
thedudeabides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2012
Posts: 989
Oh, totally. I'm just saying that we have a reflex that protects us from loud noises.

Shooting guns without hearing protection can cause damage the first shot you hear. For me it was ratting around in the back of helicopters for two years that killed my hearing. I wear plugs and earmuffs, my wife says I'm deaf like a man twice my age.
__________________
OK, so not all plastic guns are bad
thedudeabides is online now  
Old November 3, 2013, 08:41 PM   #50
Dragline45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 2,423
I can imagine spending a few years in the back of a helicopter will wreak havoc on your ears. Even some factory workers who work in much less noisier environments than you did in helicopters suffer from hearing loss from years of exposure. Like you, I always double up with plugs and muff's at the range.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but hearing loss is no joke and it is extremely important to protect ones ears.
Dragline45 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 02:02 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 0.12937 seconds with 7 queries