Anyone shoot 357 sig?

[jproaster]

I have a glock 31 and it's much cheaper to shoot reload 9s and 40s.

So whats your purpose for the 357 sig round.

John

[RamItOne]

Because some people want to be elite snobs. And next time you need to shoot through three pieces of steel you'll wish you had a .357 sig. (:

I love the round. Don't own a firearm that shoots it yet, want a P229 elite stainless in .357



Steel joke reference.
http://intrencik.com/357sig.htm

[rgrundy]

It's my G.O.O.D. gear gun. It has a 9mm barrel too. It shoots very flat so you can hit at 200 yards without alot of effort. It hits hard and penetrates lots of things a 9 or 45 won't.

[irish52084]

I've had 2 carry pistols, glock 32 and xd, in 357SIG and I'd have another if the XDM came chambered in 357SIG. It's a good round, not really any better all around than 9mm, 40 or 45, but it is a good round.

[Brian Pfleuger]

My carry fun is a G33. I shoot it because I like it.

[.357SIG]

I do. It's cheaper to reload than the .40.

[Noreaster]

I use to shoot allot of 357 Sig but it got to expensive. You always have the option of a G22 barrel and switch over to 40.

[jproaster]

Not that I'm a great shooter, but I've always thought of the round as the "reach out and touch something" round; meaning it should have more energy further out to accomplish its task.

I know that I'll never carry the round in my role in our county homeland security force. Most of us use .40 cal hollow points.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone had specific purposes for this round.

John

[jproaster]

Noreaster, I bought my 31 used and the PO added Night sights and .40 match barrel. Pretty sweet setup for $450.

[Noreaster]

That was a good deal. I hate to use this term, but I find the 357 sig to be inherently accurate. Before anyone jumps on this statement I've had the caliber in Sig and Glock and they were both a little more accurate in 357 sig then 40S&W. The thing about 357 sig is when ammo is hard to find there is usually 357 sig on the shelf.

[Dan-O]

Yep. I love the round. I make mine loud with lots of flash. I agree with others that it is inherently accurate as well.

[TunnelRat]

I agree with others that it is inherently accurate as well.

I'm inherently accurate, hence the guns I shoot are. Since my guns are inherently accurate, the bullets fired from them tend to be too. :D

I kid I kid. I love the 357 SIG. Nothing brings a bigger grin to my face than shooting that at the range. That said, whenever I see "inherently accurate", I read "fanboy". No offense.

[SRH78]

I have an M&P full size for a ccw. It is a good round, cheap to reload, and not everybody has one.

[LockedBreech]

I'd love a P229 or P226 in .357 Sig. I'm a .40 guy, but the round has a lot to offer. Very high energy, deep penetration, decent recoil.

[Noreaster]

TunnelRat I have a strange relationship with the 357 sig, kinda like an ex girlfriend. I loved it, hated it, and now I'm drifting back into it. I'm glad we live in a Country that we can buy and sell different firearms as our opinions and needs change. I hope we never get into a situation where we are limited in our choices and dependent on the opinions of others on what we can own.

[TunnelRat]

I'm glad we live in a Country that we can buy and sell different firearms as our opinions and needs change. I hope we never get into a situation where we are limited in our choices and dependent on the opinions of others on what we can own.

Uh..... okay :confused::eek:. Pretty sure nowhere did I imply that people shouldn't be allowed to own it, or that their opinions had to match mine. I even said I enjoyed it :rolleyes:. All I said was that calling any particular round "inherently accurate" is silly IMO, and I stand by that. I've seen too many people use it in caliber wars as a last ditch argument.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Inherently accurate is not a term I hear much referring to handgun rounds.

I do hear it more with the Sig than probably any other handgun round but it's certainly extremely relative, being in a world where good accuracy is INCHES at 50, even 25, yards rather than the normal usage of the term where life isn't even interesting if you can't reach 1/2 inch at 100.

[AKsRul.e]

I have a SIG P226 with both .40 and 357Sig barrels.

357Sig is about the same cost as .45 acp nowadays anyway.

[Oldjarhead]

I own and carry often a Sig Sauer P229 SAS Gen 2 pistol. I originally got a.40 caliber barrel and later got a. 357 barrel. For me the recoil motion in. 357 gets back on target faster. Down here in Texas, the state highway patrol and the Texas Rangers use the Sig Sauer P226 and c 229. They have had great success in gunfights with them.

[Noreaster]

TunnelRat that wasn't directed at you at all. I was just thinking out loud because of all the gun ban talk going on. I enjoy threads on different rounds and firearms and I pointed out I'm glad we have the ability to choose. Didn't mean to direct any implication toward you. And the the 357 sig does seem to be very accurate, (had to throw that in!)

[power5]

One thing I dislike about that penetration test is that they did not use a long barrel .45 At least use a 1911 if you are not going to use a 6" like the .357 used. He assumes a 9mm from a tight 6" barrel is the same as a m9 barrel with many rounds through it, but does nothing to back it up. Claims his friends broken in glock fires the same speed as his new 6" barrel as well. He says he chrono'd it that day too, but no pictures to prove?

That said, I want a .357sig barrel for my sig pro purchase I will be making some time this year.

Does .357sig penetrate the nontactical "softer" armor any better? Not that I ever envision needing that ability, just asking.

[TunnelRat]

Does .357sig penetrate the nontactical "softer" armor any better? Not that I ever envision needing that ability, just asking.

What does nontactical "softer" armor mean?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_vest#Performance_standards

Armor is rated by level/class. 357 SIG isn't going to penetrate anything a hot 9mm loading wouldn't.

[jmstr]

I like the potential of the round, but find it sad that so many manufacturers sell a .357sig round that has the same muzzle energy of a .40S&W.

If it is supposed to have the power of a .357 mag in an autoloader, shouldn't it have more power than a standard pressure .40S&W?

I have the S&B .357sig ammo for my G22's conversion barrel, as it has power numbers closer to a .357mag, without being +P loaded.



My reasoning? If I have a .40S&W why do I want to own a conversion barrel and ammo for something that has the same power as a .40S&W? I either want a 9mm for cheaper practice ammo or something more powerful. But buying .357sig ammo with the same power as .40S&W seems like a waste of the potential.

I am not asking the .357sig to live up to the top end of the .357mag power curve, but I feel it should be able to at least cross the threshold ino .357mag power. The S&B ammo was reasonably priced and gets into that zone, so I like it.

[power5]

I guess I meant the form fitting armor. Site I was on called it soft armor. The rifle plates made it not soft armor on that site. Bulletproofme.com I think it was. I just did a quick google now and it seems just about all the concealable armor is good for pretty much all handgun ammo.

[Noreaster]

My dept. tested the Winchester 125 grain 357 sig round against our issued vest and it zipped right through. The NIJ standards said it would stop a 158 grain JHP 357 mag round, (slower then a 125 357 mag or 357 sig.) A rep from the company came down and tried it with a vest dummy and some of the rounds still went through. Not a magical round, more of a vest failure. The smaller and faster the rounds the harder it is for woven kevlar to stop. By tactical you're probably referring to the large vest that tact teams use. Most of them will stop rifle rounds.

[Strafer Gott]

Soft armor is the level II stuff that is the minimum recommended under plate carriers. I wouldn't touch it without the plates.

[TunnelRat]

My dept. tested the Winchester 125 grain 357 sig round against our issued vest and it zipped right through. The NIJ standards said it would stop a 158 grain JHP 357 mag round, (slower then a 125 357 mag or 357 sig.) A rep from the company came down and tried it with a vest dummy and some of the rounds still went through. Not a magical round, more of a vest failure. The smaller and faster the rounds the harder it is for woven kevlar to stop. By tactical you're probably referring to the large vest that tact teams use. Most of them will stop rifle rounds.

Interesting. I've shot similar 357 SIG rounds, Winchester 125, at a retired Brinks vest and it stopped them. That would certainly make me lose a little faith in my issued vest thought. I thought the vest we shot at was only level II, but maybe it was level IIIA.