PDA

View Full Version : .40 S&W vs .357 SIG


Straight Shooter
April 30, 2006, 11:00 PM
After much research I have decided to get a Heckler & Koch P2000 V3. This will be my first handgun for the purpose of concealed carry. Now it comes down to which caliber. 9mm is out of the question so that leaves the .40 S&W and the .357 SIG. I have talked to a good number of people and I have gotten a mixed response. I was hoping you guys could help me out on deciding which caliber to pick and why. Any input or opinions would be most appreciated.

Half-Price Assassin
May 1, 2006, 09:24 AM
i would go .40s&w. why? well number one, the ammo costs, you can get some decent ammo for about $9 for a box of 50rds. .357sig ammo can cost you $13and up for a box of 50rds (more like $15 a box).

also there are more chioces with the .40 round, you have 135gr all the way up to 180gr. and the 135gr rounds are pretty close to the .357sig rounds (about 50 to 100fps slower then a 125gr .357sig). come to think of it you might be able to buy a .357sig barrel to drop into your P2000, then you would have both calibers to choose from.

.357sig is a good round, but for cost and knowing you can get .40 ammo pretty much anywhere, i would have to give the nod to the .40 (plus if you do decide to sell it, a .40 is more popular and easier to sell then a .357sig pistol).

IM_Lugger
May 1, 2006, 09:43 AM
why is it out of the question? did you listen to any mall ninjas or armchair commandos? :rolleyes:

FYI a good 9mm load will penetrate as well as .357sig and expand about as much.

don't really see the purpose of .357sig; .40s&w is compromise between .45acp and 9mm, but .357sig? :confused: basically you get a 9mm bullet and .40 capacity. I'd gather have 9mm capacity or .40 cal bullet.

shield20
May 1, 2006, 11:27 AM
I would go .40 for the reasons 1/2 price gave - and the fact that .40 starts bigger and typically finishes bigger then the .357. There may be a hard-barrier penetration difference - but to me the advantages of the .40 are well worth it.

tulsamal
May 1, 2006, 12:04 PM
i would go .40s&w. why? well number one, the ammo costs, you can get some decent ammo for about $9 for a box of 50rds. .357sig ammo can cost you $13and up for a box of 50rds (more like $15 a box).

I have a Glock 35 and a Jarvis custom barrel in .357 SIG. I was thinking about going to a shooting school this summer and they require 1500 rounds of ammo. I wanted to use the G35 so I went to ammoman.com to see the price difference. I figured I would just use the .40 stock barrel since "everybody knows" the .357 SIG ammo is much more expensive. Well, the practice level .40 S&W is $109 shipped for 500 rounds. The same ammo is $119 for 500 in .357 SIG. So we are talking about $10 per 500 rounds. I actually like shooting the .357 SIG more and the custom barrel is more accurate so now I'm leaning toward just taking the .357 SIG barrel.

FYI a good 9mm load will penetrate as well as .357sig and expand about as much.

So a 125 grain JHP out of a 9mm going 1100-1200 fps has the same ballistic performance as a 125 grain Gold Dot going 1550 fps out of my G35? Penetraion is the same AND expansion is the same? Wow, it must be some kind of magic. Where does all the extra energy go? Maybe people in orbit in the Enterprise beam it out of the wound cavity?

So would the same 9mm bullet penetrate the same and expand the same if we lowered the velocity to 850-950 fps? Why not since you claim it works the other way?! If the bullet wasn't a Gold Dot then higher velocity might well lead to no deeper penetration. Or even more shallow. But you WOULD still see more expansion and a larger wound cavity. You can't just say "there is no difference."

How high would we have to go with that Gold Dot before it would be different? 2000 fps? 2500 fps? Doesn't it seem logical that a premium bullet is going to do better at penetration, expansion, and just general destruction the faster it is moving at impact? There WILL be some point where the bullet will start to come apart and penetration will start to drop off but I hardly think that is 1550 fps in .357 SIG.

Actually go out to a range and fire off a few hundred rounds of .357 SIG in a G35 before you claim "it is no different than 9mm." There is a very real difference. My G17 reloads are 9mm +P level and they kill small to medium vermin very well. The .357 SIG out of the G35 moves it up another step. It really is like shooting things with a high energy .357 Magnum load. I'm seriously thinking about taking it up in the deer stand with me next year. I've got to see what one of those Double Tap Gold Dots will do to a whitetail deer!

Gregg

pdkflyguy
May 1, 2006, 12:09 PM
Both are great loads, and there is little compromise in either. I think it all comes down to which load you're more comfortable shooting. This is true for any caliber selection. My wife shoots a .22LR. I would rather her carry a .22LR than a .44mag simply because she can make head shots with her .22 and they all go in the target. A hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .44, and the same applies here. If you are comfortable with a 9mm, shoot that. If you like .40, use that. Between the two you've chosen, neither is VASTLY superior to the other. There are slight advantages to both, but both are good for taking down bad guys...assuming, that is, you hit him with one.

Straight Shooter
May 1, 2006, 05:21 PM
Price is not really a factor because, like tulsamal said, if you buy in bulk there is not a big difference in price. I am mainly concerned with which one performs better as a CCW.

No offense to you 9mm fans, but I want a caliber that is going to consistently put a bad guy down with one, perhaps two shots to center mass. There would be no way I would feel comfortable trusting a 9mm to perform that feat. Not to say it isn't capable of doing so, but I just wouldn't want to bet my life on it. But that is just me. To each his own.

fairview mick
May 1, 2006, 06:01 PM
I have the .40 and the .357 sig.I like them both. A little more noise from the .357 and perhaps a slight bit more recoil with the .40. I'd say-toss up, but the .357 is considerably more expensive. Don't rely on anthing that you shoot that you have metntioned that is going to put the b/g down with one or two shots. That's movie crap. if you're lucky enough to hit him directly in the head, OK, but in the upper body, Don't bet your life on it!!

TacticalDefense1911
May 1, 2006, 07:15 PM
Six, half dozen the other...street results tend to lean towards the .40 S&W with its best one shot stop percentage coming from the 165 grain Remington Golden Saber (94%). The best street results for the .357 sig come from the 125 grain Federal load (92%). Both produce well over 400 ft lbs of energy at the muzzle, both have about the same magazine capacity, and both have about the same perceived recoil ( the .40 is a bit heavier because of the heavier bullets while the .357 sig is a slightly higher pressure load).

Honestly, use what you feel the most confident with and what you can command, not tolerate. Any load with a premium defense bullet that produces 400 ft lbs or better is going to give you excellent results, whether it be a 115 grain +P+ 9mm or a 230 grain .45 ACP. Sorry Tulsamal and StraightShooter, the good 115 grain 9mm loads have proven to be just as good as the .40 S&W and the .357 sig.

Greg Bell
May 1, 2006, 07:30 PM
Ditto what tac1911 said.

Straight Shooter
May 1, 2006, 07:32 PM
I meant to say "upper chest." I just finished taking this firearm course and it seemed like on some days the instructor said "center mass" in every other sentence, so it's kind of stuck in my head.

Lawyers are not exactly calling me up to testify in court because of my ballistics expertise, but I feel fairly confident in being able to put a guy down with two rounds from a .40 S&W or a .357 SIG (assuming they are upper chest shots, he is within 10 yards, he is not obese, he is not wearing any kind of body armor, I am using quality ammunition, and I am shooting a quality gun).

I never said I would bet my life on it. I said I WOULDN'T want to bet my life on being able to do so with a 9mm.

HorseSoldier
May 1, 2006, 08:12 PM
No offense to you 9mm fans, but I want a caliber that is going to consistently put a bad guy down with one, perhaps two shots to center mass. There would be no way I would feel comfortable trusting a 9mm to perform that feat. Not to say it isn't capable of doing so, but I just wouldn't want to bet my life on it. But that is just me. To each his own.

Buy a rifle or a shotgun.

There's no handgun cartridge in the world that will deliver your desired performance level with enough consistency to bet your life on it.

Straight Shooter
May 1, 2006, 08:46 PM
For the second time:

I never said I would bet my life on it. I said I WOULDN'T want to bet my life on being able to do so with a 9mm.

allen268
May 1, 2006, 09:02 PM
-There's no handgun cartridge in the world that will deliver your desired -performance level with enough consistency to bet your life on it.

Using that same logic your just as well to carry 25s, if your satisfied that 9mm will suite your needs then no problem, but no need to be hostile towards someone who prefers a larger caliber. We each make our choice for various reasons, the person who started this thread ruled 9mm out for his own reasons.

I have shot both the 357sig and .40, in the end I stuck with .40, don?t know why but I seem to shoot better with the .40, others have the opposite experience so its one of those things where you need to shoot both before knowing which works best for you.

leadcounsel
May 1, 2006, 11:28 PM
Main reason is price AND availability of ammo.

Price/choice: As someone posted above, his research indicated a $10 difference on 500 rounds in favor of the .40. For every 1000 rounds you shoot, it will be $20 more expensive with the .357. Negligible, right? Consider this, with a .40 for every 1,000 rounds you shoot you put $20 back into your pocket. That's the price of a new spare magazine.

And I think this is a very conservative estimate and depends on the popularity of the .357 going forward. If it dies out, you may pay much more.

But in my research I suspect that the ammo will really is more expensive than that and you are limited in choices.

Ammoman.com offers only 2 types of .357 Sig: a FMJ and a TMJ both for $219per 1000. Conversely, ammoman offers a dozen choices for .40 and all the varieties for as cheap as $169 per 1000, $189 per 1000, and up to $219 and more for the ultra performing stuff. So your .357 choices are limited.

Say you shoot 20,000 rounds for practice over the life of a $500 gun (your HK is probably closer to $800).

The practice cost at todays dollars for a .40 with the least expensive ammo is $3380.

The practice cost for the .357 Sig is $4380.

The difference is $1000 or the price of two $500 handguns or the price of your HK and another 1000 rounds of ammo.

And that's assuming you will always get to order online. There are many times you may get gouged (paying 2x as much as .40) or may not even find the ammo in local gunshops.

Performance:
Neglible differences between the 9mm, .40, .357, and .45 with proper self defense ammo. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages but it all evens out.

Summary:
Now, everyone has different financial situations, but for ME I'd choose the gun that performs best at the least cost. I personally have no idea which round performs better. Honestly, after it's all said and done, I'm not a ballistics guy. I choose the .40 because that's the most common LEO round and it must be so for a reason. Maybe the 9mm is underpowered. But I could make and argument that the 9mm is the most common round sold in the world so it must be a good round. It's been around since longer (I believe) than the .45! It is versatile and cheap and has staying power for certain. It's fun and cheaper to shoot than anything else. But cops carry the .40 by and large and that's mainly why I do. There's a lot of data about the performance of the .40 and LEOs continue to use it. While the .357 may offer slight advantages with speed, etc., I doubt it makes any practical difference because if it were clear that it was far superior then everyone would shift toward it. The fact that there is lackluster support indicates to me that it doens't have much to offer that the current bullets (9mm, .40, .45) offer. It does however make a huge difference in the pocketbook over $20,000 rounds of life, which is easy to do in a small collection of pistols. TWO FREE GUNS (my pistols are generally about $500)!

fairview mick
May 2, 2006, 07:39 AM
Good post-Very informative. You've done your research. I feel the sme way, although I just like to shoot the .357 Sig. At one time, the ammo man had bulk .357 sig in Speer jhp for a reasonable price for 250 box. I bought 4 and still have some. I don't know if it's still available.
Mickey

Mark54g
May 2, 2006, 07:58 AM
I am going to chime in here. First, if you are not comfortable, that is fine. Buy what makes you happy. However, I would like to state that the problem there resides in your confidence, not the round or caliber of the round.

Please forget the notion that a handgun is an effective way to put someone down. A shotgun is not even an effective way to put someone down in many cases. For that, you want a large club or perhaps a swift sabre to remove the head.

Buy whatever gun you can comfortably shoot and control. I have said the following before, and I am about to say it again:

You will probably never draw your gun in defense of your life
If you draw, you will probably not have to shoot.
If you shoot you will probably not have to hit a vital to have them call it quits
If you hit them and they don't go down, its going make a bad day MUCH worse.

This is not my way of saying you are "not a man" or stupid or questioning your intelligence in any way. I just don't see a reason for you or anybody to be convinced of something from those who have not been there, done that and come back.

There are countless stories online, in the papers, etc about someone taking shots and staying alive. There are stories of people taking hits to the head and staying alive.
An extra mm or 100fps etc is not going to make $WeakCaliber_A into $DeathRay_1

You have many variables to work out. The shape of the bullet, the speed of the round plus the angle of entry. The physiology of the person shot along with their psychology and expectations.

If you can control a .454 then by all means, that is what you should carry (barring overpenetration concerns)

If all you can control is a .32ACP, then that is what you should carry.

Good hits matter, extra power wizzing by his collar bone don't mean squat to your family when they ID the body.

Stay safe

HorseSoldier
May 2, 2006, 09:19 AM
Using that same logic your just as well to carry 25s, if your satisfied that 9mm will suite your needs then no problem, but no need to be hostile towards someone who prefers a larger caliber. We each make our choice for various reasons, the person who started this thread ruled 9mm out for his own reasons.


I certainly did not mean to come across as hostile, but it is simply an unreasonable expectation for handgun performance in any caliber. Kind of like saying "Subcompact Honda or Hyundai? No Volkswagens, though, because I want a car that will go 150 miles per hour straight off the showroom floor, and I just don't think Volkswagen can do it." If that's your basis for buying a car, best of luck, but hopefully you'll never actually need to go 150 mph.

And it begs the next question I'd ask -- why futz about with another 9mm bullet or an modest performer in the 10mm options out there if if 9x19mm doesn't get the job done in one's opinion? There're plenty of 45 ACP designs out there that are more likely to put a guy down in one or two shots, center of mass, compared to 357 Sig, 40S&W, or 9x19 (however marginal that improvement in performance may be).


End of the day, carry what you are comfortable with and what you can use effectively. But, I'd say one should look at what data they are using to base their conclusions on concerning pistol cartridge. Ever know someone who actually used 9mm in combat (those I know who have are big on the shot placement mantra, not particularly impressed by hairsplitting about an extra 10 foot pounds here and 50 feet per second there)? Even better, ever know someone who used 9mm, 357 Sig, 40S&W and 45 ACP in combat (and if so, put him on a lecture tour so I can hear what he has to say as well)? Or are we talking about conclusions based on the "experts" who opine in assorted gun porn magazines and a heartfelt conviction that 9x19 just doesn't look scary enough next to bigger bullets?

RoSAR1
May 2, 2006, 09:29 AM
Straight Shooter you should really try reading some facts like ballistics tests so you can see for yourself the difference you're talking about is basically non-exsistent.

kjdoski
May 2, 2006, 09:39 AM
As much as I hate to chime into what's almost gone beyond the point of reasonable discussion, here goes:

- .40 S&W Pros: More loads available so you can tailor a load to your specific gun; slightly less expensive
- .40 S&W Cons: More recoil (not a lot, but some people notice it)

- .357 Pros: Flatter shooting, slightly softer recoiling, SLIGHTLY better penetration of tactical barriers (depending on what set of tests you view), slightly better ballistics out of short barrels (under 4")
- .357 Cons: More blast/flash - especially out of short barrels, slightly more expensive, fewer good loads (basically, you've got 125 grain, or nothing)

For me, I'll take 17 rounds of 9mm in my P226 over 12 rounds of either in the same platform - but that's just me...

Regards,

Kevin

USP.40
May 2, 2006, 09:47 AM
I like the simply because going in it makes a bigger hole. But I do carry a Sig P239 in .357Sig when the hot months come around. Personal preference mostly.

zzirg
May 2, 2006, 10:02 AM
I wouldn't use either of them for carry, Im a 45 acp only when it comes to personal defense(well other then 44 or 357mag.) but im talking about in a automatic,but if i had my druthers i would go with the 40,but if i had a chance i'd buy a 45.

shield20
May 2, 2006, 10:29 AM
hmmm...
I willchime in again...

You MAY never have to draw your gun in defense of your life, but most of us carry just in case. If that time does come - you will wish you gave yourself the best chance of coming out on top.

If you carry, you had better have the mindset to shoot. If you drew your weapon, assumedly you have identified a LIFE OR DEATH situation. You are now VERY close to depending on YOUR SKILL, AND THE WEAPON YOU CHOSE, to stay alive. You DO NOT want to depend on HIS generosity, HIS (lack of) courage, or HIS (lack of) determination.

If you shoot, you will hope you do the most serious damge you can in the quickest amount of time, with the least amount of rounds. That is the BEST chance to force the other guy to call it quits before HE KILLS YOU.

If you hit them and they don't go down - HIT THEM AGAIN. Make what is a terrible day better by stopping that SOB.


One of the few things we CAN control in a CCW life & death SD scenario is the weapon/caliber we carry. If one caliber gives even a percentage point or 2 advantage - I want that edge. YES - be reasonable and intelligent in your choice...be able to articulate WHY (as many here do), so you can be confident.

Another thing we can control is the level of skill we bring to the table. If you can't hit what you are aiming at with anything bigger then a .32 - practice till you can. If you just can't - then so be it.

We all make compromises by/when deciding on a handgun for self-defense. Make YOURS wisely.

Me? I choose .40SW as the best combination for me to come out on top.

IM_Lugger
May 2, 2006, 11:19 AM
So a 125 grain JHP out of a 9mm going 1100-1200 fps has the same ballistic performance as a 125 grain Gold Dot going 1550 fps out of my G35? Penetraion is the same AND expansion is the same? Wow, it must be some kind of magic. Where does all the extra energy go? Maybe people in orbit in the Enterprise beam it out of the wound cavity? a while ago someone posted complacent between a few 9mm and .357sig loads, and as I said earlier the penetration and expansion results were basically identical. A hot 9mm 124gr is more like 1300fps not 1100-1200fps. But IIRC 147gr loads performed the best, yes they have less muzzle energy but the ballistic coefficient is higher than anything in 125gr range...

Moloch
May 2, 2006, 12:35 PM
If you want a bigger hole with 9mm-like penetration grap the .40S&W.:D
If you need stopping power grap the .40S&W.
If you need penetration through hard barriers take a 180grain FMJ .40S&W
If you need rough power take a 155grain HP .40S&W
If you need penetration through hard barriers, useful expansion in the target, and rough power take a 165grain EFMJ .40S&W.
If you need a accurate cartridge with very good ballistics than take a .40S&W 155grain HP.

If you want perfection than take a Glock35 fully loaded with 165 grain EFMJ's. (optional)

:D :D

Mark54g
May 2, 2006, 01:01 PM
Shield,

My thoughts on the matter were for the following reason. Having a tool that will present itself useful in bad times, like a gun, a spare tire, a ballpoint pen makes sense. Depending on the circumstances, the odds are more likley you will need the pen, then the tire, than the gun.

This does not mean it is wrong to carry a gun. I would very much like to, but the laws in my state preclude that as a possibility.

However, please be aware that I did not mean nor intend anyone to infer that the drawing of a gun be done without the intent to protect yourself or someone else's life. It is not done lightly. In fact, I would not wait until the threat of death were there, but just that the possibility and fear for harm would be enough. If I am being encircled by a group of rather unfriendly looking fellas I would rather be wrong and have my hand on a gun than simply assume they wanted my autograph.

However, this does not mean that the situation will not possibly change once your gun comes into view. They could diffuse the situation by changing their stance to one of flight and then you are no longer in the right to shoot them (unless they are running away and returning fire, but then you should run away too).

Ask Xavier about this. I read his account of a parking lot encounter with 2 "gentlemen" who saw him merely motion towards his carry piece and decided that they were not as hungry for what he had.

As for shooting multiple times, I agree that anything worth shooting is probably worth shooting again, however the point I tried to make was regardless of the type of weapon, people have taken it and either lived, or continued to fight regardless of how much dead meat they would end up as 2 minutes later. Dead is not how you want them. Stopped is.

The gun is the tool. The weapon is the individual.

TacticalDefense1911
May 2, 2006, 03:25 PM
Moloch must have a real hard on for the .40 S&W...everytime he posts something it doesnt matter what the thread is about, he finds some way to add his two cents about the .40S&W. I guess I'll give you and "A" for effort.

shield20
May 2, 2006, 03:39 PM
Mark - understood - & agreed! You put it well - I was thinking 'good to hope for the best, AND be prepared for the worse'. Being capable AND flexible in our responses is a great point you brought out!

Moloch
May 2, 2006, 05:16 PM
Moloch must have a real hard on for the .40 S&W...everytime he posts something it doesnt matter what the thread is about, he finds some way to add his two cents about the .40S&W. I guess I'll give you and "A" for effort.

There are so many this .vs that service caliber war threads, and I can't avoid to post there.:p
You are right I guess Iam a .40 fanatic......:eek:

However just like the caliber and IMO (thats my opinion) the .40S&W is the answer to all pistol-caliber related themes. Some say that the 9mm ist too light but fast, some say the .45ACP is too slow but heavy, but the .40S&W is heavy and fast.

Did I mention its great ability for stopping boars? :D :p
Double tapped one, it fell like a rock. (EFMJ, Heart)

TacticalDefense1911
May 2, 2006, 07:49 PM
Confidence is very important when it comes to self defense...the .40 S&W is a very good round.

Mark54g
May 2, 2006, 10:51 PM
Indeed, Shield

I would much rather have to explain why my weapon is out and unfired than defend myself in court after defending myself "on the street"

While I am "sure" I could do what I need to do, there is still "hesitation" in the fact that I don't want to hurt anybody. The solace is there in that they placed themselves in a situation where they came between my life and their life. My life means more to me than their life does. That ends the discussion. If it comes to my family, their lives have more weight than my own. Somebody putting them in jeopardy has more to worry about as I will not even think about preserving my life if it means saving my family.