Any .357 Sig Fans Here?

[florida man]

I seem to recall reading articles comparing 357 Sig ballistics to the venerable 357 Mag when the round first came out.  It came up short on velocity...... more of a pretender.  If you want true 357 Mag performance in a semi-Auto carry gun, get a 1911 chambered in Win 9x23.  As easy to reload as 9x19 and feeds through commonly available 38 Super mags.

[Steve Menegon]

I seem to recall reading articles comparing 357 Sig ballistics to the venerable 357 Mag when the round first came out.  It came up short on velocity...... more of a pretender.  If you want true 357 Mag performance in a semi-Auto carry gun, get a 1911 chambered in Win 9x23.  As easy to reload as 9x19 and feeds through commonly available 38 Super mags.

I had to do some reading up on the Winchester 9x23 as I was not familiar with it. Interesting round, but everything I read pertaining to brass for the pressure, it was suggested to use nothing but Winchester brass if your barrel did not offer 100% support. Starline is thinner and bulging in non fully supported barrels. The Winchester brass also has less volume for reloaders, of which I am not. Some guys are using 5.56 brass to make their own as I guess Winchester 9x23 is hard to come by.

Anotber advantage of the 9x23 was more rounds in a 1911 gun. No big deal for me as my P229 has LEO 12 rounders and my P226 has 13 & 14 rounders.

As far as comparable velocities, Underwood's 125gr .357 Sig jhp were measured out of a P229 as per Jay in Underwood's tech department. They are rated at 1475 ft/sec. Buffalo Bore, Corbon, Double Tap, and others are all about the same 1475 ft/sec for 125/124gr offerings. I couldn't find any factory 9x23 loads using a 124gr/125gr over 1450 ft/sec. Underwood doesn't list any, my findings were based on DT, Buffalo Bore, and Corbon. Perhaps initial offerings of .357 Sig years ago were not what is available today.

I also looked at load data and found in the 124gr listings (Load data.com I think it was), none of the suggested maximums end up with a velocity over 1467 ft/sec. Peanuts in terms of difference. These were out of a 5" barrel.

Paul Harrel has a cool 3 part series on .357 Sig that is really informative. I found multiple videos of people hitting +1500 ft/sec out of Glocks with 5" barrels. I searched for some 9x23, but not much there.

In any case, as fun as the 9x23 sounds, it isn't faster than any factory .357 Sig load I found. I wouldn't want to get hit with either of them!

[Fuzzy Sights]

Steve,

Also enjoyed the Paul Harrell videos.  Do not have a 9x23, but do shoot a 38 Super Comp, which is close.  Never got the velocity out of the comp that I do out of the 357 Sig.  Can run the 124s well into the 1500s before I see pressure signs and have one load with 147 XTPs that is just short 1400 fps.  These are using my SIG 229.  The longer barrel on my 75 CTS may improve on these numbers.  Reliability is better with the Sig, granted the 38 Super Comp was built as a game gun from the beginning.

The idea behind the Sig was to develop a cartridge that matched the Remington 125 gr HP that had a documentation of 95% one shot stop back in the 90s.  Sig claimed that the 229 with this cartridge would equal the Remington round out of a 6 inch barrel.  What happened is that back in the 90s a lot of load development for 357 Mag increased velocity for all bullet weights, but especially 125s got almost 150 fps boost over just a couple of years.  Sadly 357 Sig has never enjoyed that kind of attention.  I have no doubt that safe loads could be developed for the cartridge that would easily match the new 357 Mag loads, given equivalent barrel lengths.

From a personal protection perspective the Sig is far superior to 9mm in that it does not require high tech bullets to achieve optimal results.  The problem with 9mm is that you needs super special loads that cost $2.00 a shot.  Most people could never afford enough to even verify reliability and sight in their pistol.  Had a resent test with some of those high cost rounds and found that they were not fast enough to even start to open the hollow points and thus over penetrated.  Worked up the costs with one of these rounds and the cost of the ammo just to verify and sight in and have 200 rounds on hand cost more than the pistol and 3 mags.  Assumed it only took 100 rounds for verification and sight-in.

Cost on ammo and availability between 9x23 and 357 Sig actually might be in the 357 Sig's favor, which is saying something.  The additional capacity of a couple rounds I am not sure is all that valuable unless you are looking at single stack mags.  12+1 in my Compact 75 and 14+1 in full size and 17+1 in my TS. Do not feel under gunned with the Compact.

Sorry for rambling.  Wish you the best on your choice.

JW

[Dred]

This dummy added 2 calibers recently (evy'bdy should add calibers smack in the middle of an ammopocalypse - big fun time).  One is 357 Sig and I'm liking it plenty.  Started by bringing home a one-of Kel Tec Sub 9 chambered in 357 Sig (Sub 9 is actually a folding metal framed carbine that preceded the plastic fantastic Sub 2000).  And actually just got my Silverback (Dan Wesson/CZ 10mm) back from my gunsmith.  It still runs 10mm but it now has a complimentary 357 Sig option.

Sent from my Lenovo YT3-X90F using Tapatalk

[RSR]

.357 sig > .40 s&w. 

I'd also argue .40 s&w > .45 acp given greater mag capacity, but not round to round.
That means .357 sig is greater than .45 acp.

However, 9mm is higher capacity and more controllable than all of above, and accuracy/precision is paramount for pistols. 
So 9mm vs above is a materially different consideration IMO -- above are largely which form of greater recoil than 9mm do you control best...

If you're in a 10 round or less pistol mag capacity state, then .45 acp or gap are clearly best.

YMMV.

[Steve Menegon]

Fuzzy, I'm sticking with the .357 Sig stuff. No need for me to do as Dred has and add another caliber during this "mess". I already added my 10mm, but I was able to find good deals on both 10mm and .357 Sig. I'm good on both for now.

Dred, love the idea of switching from 10mm to .357 Sig. 👍 Great job! I wanted a Sig Nightmare in .357 Sig, but missed out.

RSR, I get your logic, but I shoot my 229 as well if not better than my 9mm. I also read a report that had a statistic about .357 Sig and other rounds in terms of rounds to stop a threat. 1.6 less for .357 Sig vs 9mm. One could argue that would even out the capacity argument, if you hit the bad guy. Just twisting numbers. 😎

[Fuzzy Sights]

Dred,

Would love to see some pics of your rig.  That sounds really neat.  Also post on how she shoots. 

JW

[Dred]

Dred,

Would love to see some pics of your rig.  That sounds really neat.  Also post on how she shoots. 

JW

I will edit in pics in a moment.  I ran 4 mags of 357 Sig yesterday.  She ran flawlessly - no failures.  Recoil is easily managed - one mag was dumped (8 rounds in less than 5 sec from 10 yards) hand sized group.

She is hitting low but I'm not adjusting the sight until I confirm POI shift 10mm to 357 Sig. 

Apologies in advance 'cause the visual clues hardly distinguish the caliber swap.  The stamping on the 10mm barrel is deeper, and the muzzle plus bushing are different.  Also swapping recoil spring to Wilson Flatwire 17lb for 357 Sig.




So, my Silverback is a true first world conundrum.  10 is my favorite and 357 Sig is gaining fast.  Enjoying either denies enjoyment of the other.

[powernoodle]

Here is an anti- 357 Sig viewpoint from Lucky Gunner.  Which I tend to agree with.  The basis thesis is that you get the same ballistics from a hot 9mm without some of the downsides of the 357 Sig (noise, blast, etc.).  The marketplace seems to have adopted the anti - 357 Sig position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pkus6kKodpU

[RSR]

Here is an anti- 357 Sig viewpoint from Lucky Gunner.  Which I tend to agree with.  The basis thesis is that you get the same ballistics from a hot 9mm without some of the downsides of the 357 Sig (noise, blast, etc.).  The marketplace seems to have adopted the anti - 357 Sig position.

You have to get to +P+ 9mm to approach .375 sig velocities.  BUT there's no standard for what 9mm +P+ is, and a lot of 9mm guns recommend against +P ammo, let alone +P+, and sometimes using +P ammo will even void warranties.  That's pretty important for work-issued weapons in our litigious society.

For +P 9mm, you need a 16" barrel to approach .357 magnum point blank energy, which is roughly equivalent to .357 sig -- from the 16" Keltec Sub2k's owner manual:


That said and recognizing that .357 sig was developed in early 90s, I agree that modern bullets have narrowed terminal effect performance (especially considering that many .357 sig rounds use 9mm bullets); however ballistically, .357 sig is still superior -- and that's especially important for folks who sometimes engage threats with handguns at distance like LE with full-size duty weapons and much less so for civilians who typically use more compact handguns at point blank range for self-defense.

YMMV.

[powernoodle]

Good stuff, sir.  I guess the question then becomes whether additional velocity (in pistols) adds any terminal performance.  I would tend to answer that in the negative, though I don't have any skin in the game.

I just gotta throw in one more Lucky Gunner video.  Not to advocate any particular view, but because I find the subject matter so interesting.  This one, wherein Chris Baker interviews two actual experts in the field, posits that most modern handgun calibers perform more or less the same against human targets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6kUvi72s0Y

[Fuzzy Sights]

The problem not discussed is still cost.  With 9mm ammo you need a "High Tech" bullet to get your desired results.  Who can afford to pay the cost of their firearm to verify reliability, sight in and practice with $2.00 a shot ammo, even before COVID.  Have a shooting buddy at my range who shoots exclusively 9mm NATO ball for matches, practice and defense.  He knows it over penetrates, but his gun is sight in and he is very good with it.  Like the guy a lot, understand why he is making the choice, but I am not moving next door.

It also occurs to me that Lucky Gunner would like you to purchase the high cost and high tech bullet from them.

Strongly prefer a caliber that can meet the FBI goals without the Technology or Cost.  Keeping them in the A zone takes training even at short combat distances.  This is also a perishable skill that has to be maintained.  That high cost ammo that you only load in your gun at home or in your EDC, is not all that useful if you practice with something else entirely.  Another person I used to shoot with (he retired to AZ) always carried Federal NYCLAD HP ammo in his pistol.  This stuff must have been 40 years old.  He only had two boxes so he had not even tested the ammo in over a decade.  When I convinced him to shoot a mag he had two failures. The ammo he was depending his life on, would likely get him killed.

Paul Harrell did a video on this subject, though he labeled it Hyper Ammo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayd4sxW_RUA

I know that my opinions are my own and the die hard 9mm fans will not be convinced.  If you can afford to shoot the high tech 9mm ammo, power to you; doubt seriously that most can. I hope for all this remains a academic subject and none of us ever have to employ our defensive pistols at anything other than paper or steel.  All of us make choices, nice to have the freedom to do so.

JW

[RSR]

The problem not discussed is still cost.  With 9mm ammo you need a "High Tech" bullet to get your desired results.  Who can afford to pay the cost of their firearm to verify reliability, sight in and practice with $2.00 a shot ammo, even before COVID.  Have a shooting buddy at my range who shoots exclusively 9mm NATO ball for matches, practice and defense.  He knows it over penetrates, but his gun is sight in and he is very good with it.  Like the guy a lot, understand why he is making the choice, but I am not moving next door.

It also occurs to me that Lucky Gunner would like you to purchase the high cost and high tech bullet from them.

Strongly prefer a caliber that can meet the FBI goals without the Technology or Cost.  Keeping them in the A zone takes training even at short combat distances.  This is also a perishable skill that has to be maintained.  That high cost ammo that you only load in your gun at home or in your EDC, is not all that useful if you practice with something else entirely.  Another person I used to shoot with (he retired to AZ) always carried Federal NYCLAD HP ammo in his pistol.  This stuff must have been 40 years old.  He only had two boxes so he had not even tested the ammo in over a decade.  When I convinced him to shoot a mag he had two failures. The ammo he was depending his life on, would likely get him killed.

Paul Harrell did a video on this subject, though he labeled it Hyper Ammo.

I know that my opinions are my own and the die hard 9mm fans will not be convinced.  If you can afford to shoot the high tech 9mm ammo, power to you; doubt seriously that most can. I hope for all this remains a academic subject and none of us ever have to employ our defensive pistols at anything other than paper or steel.  All of us make choices, nice to have the freedom to do so.

JW

I think the consideration is or was that if using a full size duty pistol with longer sight radius and if law enforcement or a military unit primarily limited to sidearms for immediate engagements, then there is benefit to a flat shooting cartridge with greater penetration capabilities.  Especially if transition from revolvers -- much greater capacity than .357 magnum @ 12+1 for compact Sig P229 and 15+1 for full-size P226 and other similar in respective classes (basically, 2x capacity relatively to similarly sized wheelguns). 

Really, it's more of a PDW vs handgun niche -- inching toward the former.

Remember .357 sig was developed nearly 20 years ago, and bonded, barrier-blind, and controlled-expansion rounds really weren't common then, if they'd even been developed.  For instance, just look how far military small arms development has come from 9/11/2001 to today.
And that's before we get into computer-aided design, more complex modeling/artificial intelligence programs, etc, that are now commonly integrated into product development and that allow such to occur MUCH more rapidly and effectively than it used to.

I think this is a fair summary of what led to .357 sig and it's downfall: https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2018/12/26/a-need-for-speed-rise-and-fall-of-the-bottlenecked-pistol-cartridge

BUT the need to defeat body armor and/or engage at distance with compact weapons does leave a niche for bottleneck cartridges like .357 sig; however, since it wasn't purpose-built for that niche, I don't know if it has any lasting legs for that niche though.  22 tcm is probably a better contender if for some reason FN's 5.7x28 or HK's 4.6x30 went by the wayside.

*One thing to note is that the transition to .357 sig does make a heck of a lot more sense than super hot 9mm +P++ subgun ammo like the Isrealis made for their uzis that could chamber and fire in handguns where it might be unsafe. 

[wanderson]

I like my G32, dropped it in a Micro Roni braced chassis and I’m surprised how flat shooting a round it is out to 50 yards, compared to my other pistol caliber carbines in 9mm, .45acp & 10mm.

If you only want one caliber, 9mm is certainly a good choice. But that’s boring.

Shame there aren’t more firearms in this caliber.

One thing I’ve always liked about .357sig is it’s available in mid-size/subcompact sized pistols, if you want a 10mm handgun you’re stuck with a full sized frame.

[huskerlrrp]

Gratuitous picture of my 357SIG SP-01. I've been working up a LeHigh defense bullet with AA#7 that could be interesting. Otherwise I am able to push a 125 Gold dot over 1500fps without signs of pressure.

Sent from my SM-S506DL using Tapatalk