Any Firearms Manufacturer make a 357 SIG "pocket pistol"?

[silvermane_1]

Did any firearms manufacturers make a 357 SIG "pocket pistol"?, I know there 40 S&W sized "pocket pistols" but I heard there was possibly 357 SIG chambored one, but that was years ago. I think some folks had converted thier 40 S&W "pocket pistols" to 357 SIG, but I was wondering if there were any from the factory in 357 SIG or at least "plans" to have factory made one that never materialized.

[gbclarkson]

What do you view as a pocket pistol? I picture Kel-tec p-32 sized pistols while others pocket carry a J-frame. Is a .40 Shield a pocket-sized pistol for you?

Sig's P239 was available in 9mm, .40 and .357 Sig. Glock also has the "subcompact" or "big-pocket" G33.

[Onward Allusion]

I can't think of any true pocket sized pistols in 357 Sig. Glock 33 and S&W Shield come to mind but they're not that small. Unless your pockets are really big, it's not going to fit.

357 Sig has pretty stiff recoil. I can't imagine shooting it it out of something the size of a LCP or Pico.

[JMag1]

The now discontinued Sig P224 subcompact was available in .357 Sig, but many would agree it was a bit large to label as a pocket carry piece.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Forte S+W]

The closest I've ever seen to a pocket pistol in .357 SIG was the recently discontinued SIG P239.

That being said, there's a reason why nobody makes pocket pistols in any greater cartridge than 9mm Luger. A few companies such as Kel-Tec had experimented with lightweight compact pistols in .40 S&W, but they proved to be extremely susceptible to user-induced malfunctions because they were difficult for the shooter to control under recoil.
Ever wonder why Ruger never bothered to make a .40cal version of their extremely popular LC9? Because Kel-Tec already tried with the P40 and couldn't fix the fact that inability to control the recoil out of the lightweight pistol would cause a malfunction with each shot.

As far as I know, nobody ever even bothered to try with .357 SIG, but then again, if it didn't work for .40 S&W then obviously it wouldn't work well for the sharper recoiling .357 SIG either.

Let me give you some advice from someone who long sought a .40cal pocket pistol, just accept that they aren't made for a reason, and as comfortable as it is to carry a lightweight pistol that will slip right into your pocket like the Ruger LCP or LC9, you just can't get a reliable pistol of similar size/weight chambered in a more powerful cartridge.
In fact, I think that part of the reason why .40 S&W and .357 SIG have declined in popularity isn't just because they were dropped by Law Enforcement, but because folks want to carry smaller, lighter pistols which just can't handle the greater recoil impulse. .40 S&W and .357 SIG make the most sense in full-size, double-stack service pistols because that's where their recoil is the lightest.

[lee n. field]

I checked the XD series. I know for a while there they were making them in almost every mainstream chambering. As far as I can tell, never an XD subcompact in .357 SIG, other than a conversion barrel.

[Siggy-06]

I would imagine, with enough spring strength and frame support, .357 sig could be put into something the size of a Glock 43 maybe. However, 357 sig in a short barrel probably wont perform as good. Probably be a bit snappy in a 16oz gun too.

[AK103K]

I had a P239 in 357SIG, and it was an easy shooter.

I personally always thought 357SIG shot about the same a 9mm+P+ out of the same type guns, and Ive owned and shot a number of both. The only real difference between them being the 357SIG's "bark". Its not the heavy recoiling round many seem to think.

And since 9mm +P+ is pretty close to 357SIG performance (in standard factory fodder, not the souped up boutique stuff), if you just gotta have that power (for whatever it might be worth in those smaller guns), there are plenty of 9mm guns these days that are small enough to fit the pocket criteria.

[Forte S+W]

@AK103K
The difference is that the vast majority of 9mm pistols strongly advise against the use of +P+ ammunition, and I doubt that any pocket-sized 9mm pistol would hold up well to +P+ ammo, assuming that it will even cycle reliably without a heavier aftermarket recoil spring.
In fact, some lightweight 9mm pistols such as the Ruger LC9s suggest that ordinary +P ammo being reserved strictly for defensive use once reliability has been confirmed in order to minimize wear.

So yeah, while +P+ ammo may in some cases be comparable in performance to .357 SIG, you need a heavy duty (police or military grade) 9mm pistol to safely shoot +P+ loads without it battering the gun.

[JDBerg]

LW .357 SIG conversion barrels work in either a Glock 27 40 S&W or (better yet) a Glock 29 10mm. There is also the Gen3 & 4 Glock 33 chambered for .357 SIG

[AK103K]

In reality, they are really the only pocket guns around that would be able to give you close to 357SIG power, since there are no 357SIG guns. Not that those smaller guns are going to really come close to that out of those short barrels. They barely make full power with them in 4" and 5" full size guns.

I think most of the more current 9mm's would probably be OK with +P+, especially if you werent feeding it a steady diet of it (which in reality with the little guns, probably really isnt an issue for most who carry them). You could always practice with standard or +p level 9mm (assuming you were actually shooting it that much in practice) and I doubt youd notice the difference if you were shooting +P+, especially under stress. And again, what you get out of the shorter barrels is going to be the same as the 357SIG.

Personally, I think youd be fine with standard 9mm in the smaller guns, as long as you practiced regularly enough with them to be competent/proficient with them in realistic shooting.

[Forte S+W]

@AK103K
Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable shooting +P+ loads out of a gun if its owners manual advises against it, unless it was a military/LE grade firearm which is obviously suited for +P+ since that's what a lot of LE uses and military uses hot NATO spec ammo.

Yeah, it would most likely be fine shooting just enough to ensure that it will cycle reliably under ordinary operating conditions, but I'd rather just get a slightly larger pistol like a Glock 27 or an M&P40 Shield then convert it to .357 SIG than shoot overpressure ammo out of a gun that wasn't designed for it like a Ruger LC9s or SIG P938.

Ah, but then again, I'm really not much of a +P guy. If a standard pressure loading doesn't do it for me, then the 10-15% increase gained by +P ammo won't either, so I just go straight to a more powerful cartridge. Sure, it's obviously cheaper to just buy hotter rounds than it is to buy a whole new gun, but +P and especially +P+ loads cost more than regular ammo, and if the stock recoil spring is too light to cycle +P+ reliably then you have to buy a heavier aftermarket recoil spring to fix that, and honestly if you feel that what you have is insufficient, then why not just trade it in for something more powerful anyway? But again, that's just me, and I'm not one to go telling others what they ought to be using for self-defense.

[Cheapshooter]

Doubt it seriously. Considering a Glock 42 is borderline pocketable, and the 43 is even bigger.
But then if you want to wear Adventurer Bill cargo pants, or clown suits all the time you can pocket carry anything.
A true pocket carry equals mouse gun.

[silvermane_1]

Well I meant the like the SCCYs and P11 sized guns, and yes are consider large "pocket guns".
Also I envision a 357SIG "pocket pistol" as a "bigger wrench" equivalent to the 25 NAA and 32 NAA, and I guess 400 Cor-Bon could "fit the bill" in a 1911 Officers size. Fun Fact Cor-Bon was involved in the design and development of the 25 NAA and 32 NAA.

[Adventurer 2]

During the early 2000s - I had wanted a HK P2000SK in 357 Sig. That desire was replaced w a 12 oz 357 magnum.

[silvermane_1]

Originally Posted by Adventurer 2

During the early 2000s - I had wanted a HK P2000SK in 357 Sig. That desire was replaced w a 12 oz 357 magnum.

Cool there Adventurer 2, I have a similar pairing in my sigline, a 357 XD and Security-Six.

[Forte S+W]

@Cheapshooter

I personally consider anything that can fit in the pockets of a standard jacket or relaxed fit jeans to count as pocket pistols, ergo even subcompact pistols like the Ruger LC9s, Walther PPK/S, SIG P938, Beretta Nano, etc are pocket pistols.
Granted that they can't fit in just about any pocket like the Kel-Tec P3AT/Ruger LCP, Beretta Pico, S&W M&P Bodyguard, SIG P238, but they'll fit in the hip pocket of just about any pair of pants save for maybe skinny jeans.

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by silvermane_1

Well I meant the like the SCCYs and P11 sized guns, and yes are consider large "pocket guns".
Also I envision a 357SIG "pocket pistol" as a "bigger wrench" equivalent to the 25 NAA and 32 NAA, and I guess 400 Cor-Bon could "fit the bill" in a 1911 Officers size. Fun Fact Cor-Bon was involved in the design and development of the 25 NAA and 32 NAA.

I have carried an XDS, which is (I think) a bit larger yet, in a pocket holster in business casual slacks. Depends on your pockets.

[Ruger45LC]

I carry my G27 in my pocket, I just wear cargo jeans/shorts and a remora holster and it fits just fine. It's not tiny but it doesn't stick out for the world to see, a G33 is the same size.

[Dan-O]

I thought Kel Tec made a conversion barrel from P40 to P357sig.

Don’t think they ever made a P357 though

[Forte S+W]

Even if they did, the P40 was discontinued because it was prone to user-induced malfunctions occurring under recoil. Basically, anything less than a death grip had a tendency to cause the same sort of malfunction that limp-wristing can cause among certain pistols, so Kel-Tec discontinued the P40 because they were constantly getting perfectly reliable P40s sent in for repair and although they supposedly attempted to remedy the issue by altering the user manual with instructions on how to grip the P40 firmly/securely, it didn't work.
Unfortunately, the P40 was essentially defective by design, an extremely lightweight .40cal pistol with a tendency to malfunction under recoil.

So even if you could track down both a used P40 and a .357 SIG conversion barrel for it, you'd then have to contend with the extremely narrow margin for error while shooting it, and that's really not something you want out of a carry pistol.

[Dan-O]

I wasn’t recommending it. Just putting the facts out there. I’m one of the idiots that still has my P40 I guess.

[pete2]

S&W makes J-Frames in .357 Mag. caliber that will carry in a pocket. Semis larger than an LCP don't fit in my pocket but a 642 will fit and can be drawn with your hand around the handle. I can carry an LC9 but can't draw it.

[hagar]

AFAIK the smallest 357 Sig pistols are the Glock 33 and Sig 239.

[Forte S+W]

Originally Posted by Dan-O

I wasn’t recommending it. Just putting the facts out there. I’m one of the idiots that still has my P40 I guess.

That doesn't make you an idiot, there's no sense in getting rid of a gun that works just because the line it comes from doesn't have a great reputation nor because it was discontinued. (My current carry gun is a S&W SIGMA, which has a pretty terrible reputation due to issues with the Gen 1 models at launch and for having a heavy trigger. And I use a Taurus Judge for Home Defense.)

Many folks own a P40 and love it. Heck, if I could find a P40 for a good price then I'd buy one myself. Like you, I was merely sharing information on the subject.