.357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Handgun, Pistol and Revolver topics

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

B9ev
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 8:28 am

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by B9ev » Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:17 pm

I have a P2000sk in 357sig as well. A simple barrel swap makes it a .40s&w. I feel that the gun does handle 357 better than 40 but I like having the option of being able to shoot both.
Maverick299 wrote:It comes down to what make the most sense for you. My daily carry is either a .357 mag or .357 sig, if I could go back and do it all over again.....I'd still own the .357 sig!

If you already have the .40 you may be better served by spending the money on ammo.........really depends on your particular situation.

HK P2000SK .357 Sig (on my hip as I type this)
Image

User avatar
Phoenix David
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 3110
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:28 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: I am legend, Omega man
Location: Glendale, Az

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Phoenix David » Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:31 pm

JTNieman wrote:
pseay02 wrote:I love the idea of .357 SIG I'm just debating cause I can buy 500rds of .40 ammo for the same price as the barrel and if they will both do the same job it's not worth it
That's the only thing that's stopped me from buying a 40cal upper and 357SIG barrel for my M&P9... I really want to, but there's that nagging part of my brain.... you know, the part the relies on sense. :lol:
Damn you for posting that so I can read it :vmad: Now I'll have to buy one.
Nobody ever wishes they brought a smaller gun to a gun fight

User avatar
Phoenix David
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 3110
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:28 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: I am legend, Omega man
Location: Glendale, Az

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Phoenix David » Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:37 pm

IMO:

1. Pick a solid preforming SD round
2 Practice lots
3. Profit???
4. Shoot till they stop.
Nobody ever wishes they brought a smaller gun to a gun fight

User avatar
JaPes
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:38 pm
Location: Lake Zurich, IL

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by JaPes » Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:50 pm

Well you are still putting a 9mm projectile in a 9mm hole. The power gain is in the combination of greater case volume and the bottleneck.
"I drank what?!?" - Socrates

User avatar
JTNieman
* * * * *
Posts: 9409
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:22 pm
Location: Greater STL Area

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by JTNieman » Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:59 pm

JaPes wrote:Well you are still putting a 9mm projectile in a 9mm hole. The power gain is in the combination of greater case volume and the bottleneck.
Bottle neck can actually decrease your velocity gain, as it takes longer for the power to burn, leaving your relative pressure lower. Most higher pressure, higher power rounds are straight wall cases. I'm told that it's to do with the amount of air that can get into the case to facilitate the burning of the powder evenly and expediently. Of course, maybe if you're getting down to that level of physics/chemistry, it's splitting hairs. It's always hard for me to tell how MUCH of an impact some of these little tidbits I learn are in the BIG PICTURE of things.

User avatar
PistolPete
ZS Moderator
ZS Moderator
Posts: 6573
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: St Louis

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by PistolPete » Thu Aug 30, 2012 5:34 pm

JTNieman wrote: Bottle neck can actually decrease your velocity gain, as it takes longer for the power to burn, leaving your relative pressure lower. Most higher pressure, higher power rounds are straight wall cases. I'm told that it's to do with the amount of air that can get into the case to facilitate the burning of the powder evenly and expediently. Of course, maybe if you're getting down to that level of physics/chemistry, it's splitting hairs. It's always hard for me to tell how MUCH of an impact some of these little tidbits I learn are in the BIG PICTURE of things.
Hrm? Are you suggesting that 45-70 and 444 Marlin have advantages over bottleneck cartridges?
If you're only talking pistol cartridges I think it's more an ease of manufacture thing as to why they aren't bottlenecked.
Steemit, where I write stuff now

Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first.
- Mark Twain
Image

User avatar
ZTFH
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:17 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: 28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead (both versions) Day of the Dead
Location: Portland, OR

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by ZTFH » Thu Aug 30, 2012 6:15 pm

JTNieman wrote: I'm told that it's to do with the amount of air that can get into the case to facilitate the burning of the powder evenly and expediently.
I'm not sure if that's it, powder doesn't need any outside air or gas in order to ignite, perhaps it's an issue of turbulence in the case being greater with necked down casings or something like that? Admittedly this is getting pretty deep into the complex physics of the whole thing that I'm not really qualified to talk about.
Make a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Catch a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life!

User avatar
JTNieman
* * * * *
Posts: 9409
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:22 pm
Location: Greater STL Area

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by JTNieman » Thu Aug 30, 2012 6:36 pm

PistolPete wrote:
JTNieman wrote: Bottle neck can actually decrease your velocity gain, as it takes longer for the power to burn, leaving your relative pressure lower. Most higher pressure, higher power rounds are straight wall cases. I'm told that it's to do with the amount of air that can get into the case to facilitate the burning of the powder evenly and expediently. Of course, maybe if you're getting down to that level of physics/chemistry, it's splitting hairs. It's always hard for me to tell how MUCH of an impact some of these little tidbits I learn are in the BIG PICTURE of things.
Hrm? Are you suggesting that 45-70 and 444 Marlin have advantages over bottleneck cartridges?
If you're only talking pistol cartridges I think it's more an ease of manufacture thing as to why they aren't bottlenecked.
No, I'm saying that the guys I know who are wildcatters tell me that straight walled cases naturally lead to faster, more efficient powder burn, because the area of opening of the case is at the maximum possible for the volume of the case.

I was just saying that when speaking of 'power' (which I can only assume is velocity, when all other things are equal, about the cartridge) that with all-else-being-equal, a straight wall case would be advantageous over a bottle necked case - not vice versa.

ZTFH wrote:
JTNieman wrote: I'm told that it's to do with the amount of air that can get into the case to facilitate the burning of the powder evenly and expediently.
I'm not sure if that's it, powder doesn't need any outside air or gas in order to ignite, perhaps it's an issue of turbulence in the case being greater with necked down casings or something like that? Admittedly this is getting pretty deep into the complex physics of the whole thing that I'm not really qualified to talk about.
Shit, good point. I'm not sure what it was then. Maybe it was the gas created being able to escape the case better. Shit, I'm all confused now.

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Thu Aug 30, 2012 6:55 pm

Bottlenecked cases, IMHO, are baby rocket motors. Longer barrels allow them to do cool shit. Short barrels mean big flash and "meh" performance.

I am talking solely from looking at the angles, and thinking that a bottlenecked case looks like a solid-state rocket motor. I could totally be wrong, just makign a layman's observation.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

User avatar
Gaston
* *
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 4:32 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Chuck Norris and Jason Statham movies. I mean, you can't kill them, they don't suck blood so they aren't vampires, or change into an animal during a full moon so they aren't were-beasts, so they pretty much have to be Zombies, right?
Location: "upper east" TN

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Gaston » Thu Sep 27, 2012 6:50 pm

JTNieman wrote:Shit, good point. I'm not sure what it was then. Maybe it was the gas created being able to escape the case better. Shit, I'm all confused now.
Makes more sense. I think that's more important in short-barreled handguns, but powder performance/selection is probably a more important factor in getting the most out of a pistol cartridge.

And never, ever, believe a reloader, remember it was a reloader (P. O. Ackley) who invented the Eargesplittenloudenboomer, which was a .378 Weatherby Magnum case necked to .224 to try to get 5,000 fps out of a rifle. If Wikipedia is right, he did make it to 4,600 fps with a 50gr bullet, I bet he could have hit his 5k mark with one of the modern powders - hell, I suspect one of the powder companies these days would have collaborated with him until they did it.

Sorry, I haven't reloaded in years but it never leaves your bloodstream, and I simply can't pass up a chance to pass on some old-guy reloading trivia.

Tommy Tran
* * * *
Posts: 996
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:42 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Tommy Tran » Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:15 pm

JT- Smokeless powder should have all the O2 it needs to combust in the chemical nature of the oxidizer in the powder... no external O2 needed think about rounds that are waterproof/air tight in their cases...

I think bottlenecks are faster in terms of the neckdown creating a venturi effect when if a given volume(expanding in the case of gun powder)of gas is passing through a port of reduced diameter(assuming its smooth-ish)its velocity must increase(if pressure stayed the same, again in our case it is rising as a pistol barrel generally isnt long enough to have the projectile in the barrel when the powder has passed its peak pressure)... Sorry if that was a long run on sentence lol
phil_in_cs wrote:well, I can guarantee you it won't over penetrate. It has to penetrate before it can over penetrate....
gravediggerfour wrote:For those of you with Mr. Fancy Pants gas piston AR's better stock up on the parts that are not interchangable.
TravisM.1 wrote:If a rifle is an option, a rifle is usually the answer.

User avatar
ArkansasFan30
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 3:21 am
Favorite Zombie Movies: Can there be a fav?
Location: Arkansas, USA

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by ArkansasFan30 » Sun Oct 14, 2012 5:39 am

pseay02 wrote:So I have a question. Everyone agrees that .357 magnum is a better stopper than a. 40. However everyone also says. 357 SIG is no better than a. 40. However a properly loaded. 357 SIG from a 4.5" barrel will hang right with a federal 125gr. .357 magnum from a 4" barrel. So why is. I fully understand that a hot. 357 magnum load will leave the SIG load in the dust. But in these loadings I view them as equal. Does anyone else have a different perspective on this? As underwood ammo lists the 125gr. 357 SIG @ 1450 fps. And federal lists the 125 gr. 357 magnum at 1440 fps
The .357 Sig was designed to mimic the transferred energy of the .357 Magnum plus feed through an automatic. I've never shot a Magnum although I'm in the market to add one to my collection, but the Sig round is fun to shoot. It's got a good sound and a fun recoil. Tactially, however, the muzzle flash is killer, it's louder (to me) than a .40 with more recoil.

I know a .357 Sig round is an excellent penetrator. I don't know about Magnums. I do, however, now that NIJ rates a Level II ballistic vest as being sufficient to stop a .357 Magnum round while a Level IIIA (more protection) is rated to stop the .357 Sig. Take that for what it's worth. Level IIIA is the highest level of protection marketed for concealable wear. Anything higher is a plate.

Leper Messiah
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:40 pm

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Leper Messiah » Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:15 am

pseay02 wrote:I love the idea of .357 SIG I'm just debating cause I can buy 500rds of .40 ammo for the same price as the barrel and if they will both do the same job it's not worth it
The exact reason I still have not gotten a 357sig barrel for my 23C. I'll only buy one if I can find one I want dirt cheap. I do have a KKM 9mm conversion barrel and it paid for itself quickly in ammo costs savings. Frankly I wouldn't feel any safer or better protected with 357sig over 40cal loaded with 135 jhp. Ammo cost is a real deal breaker also. 357sig is nice if money is no object or money is an object but you don't practice much. I prefer to practice regularly.

User avatar
Captain Hero
* *
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:11 pm

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Captain Hero » Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:09 pm

When I select bullets for carry, I dont look at velocity as a deciding factor. Speed is good, but I try to find the best balance of speed vs. weight. Its a trade off regardless of caliber.

I feel these debates are moot and useless with all the great loads out now in various calibers.. But velocity junkies and energy junkies wont let these debates be what they are. .357 Sig and .40 are about the same as Im concerned. One has bullet weights of the 9mm, the other of the 10mm. They offer the same capacity. I dont feel that one will give the shooter an edge, as not all shooting scenarios are identical. To me its just preference.
If you live nothing, you are nothing

User avatar
400 Grains
* * * * *
Posts: 1110
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:30 pm

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by 400 Grains » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:26 pm

9mm.

User avatar
400 Grains
* * * * *
Posts: 1110
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:30 pm

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by 400 Grains » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:47 pm

ArkansasFan30 wrote:I know a .357 Sig round is an excellent penetrator. I don't know about Magnums. I do, however, now that NIJ rates a Level II ballistic vest as being sufficient to stop a .357 Magnum round while a Level IIIA (more protection) is rated to stop the .357 Sig. Take that for what it's worth. Level IIIA is the highest level of protection marketed for concealable wear. Anything higher is a plate.
Uhhh.... well.... sorta...

The NIJ test round for level 2 is a .357 mag 158 grain soft point at 1340 fps, where the IIIA round is a .357 Sig FMJ at 1410. A 357 Mag 125 FMJ would perform on armor similarly at the same velocity. NIJ chose .357 Sig for the new standard because it was new and agencies were asking about it.

In terminal performance testing, .357 Sig defense ammo penetrates similarly to .40, though some .40's and 9mm's penetrate better than most .357 Sigs. Good .45's perform much better than .357 Sig.

.357 Sig terminal performance is about the same as 9 and .40. It excels at flash, noise, and recoil, however, so you got that advantage going for you......

User avatar
400 Grains
* * * * *
Posts: 1110
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:30 pm

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by 400 Grains » Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:01 pm

Captain Hero wrote:I feel these debates are moot and useless with all the great loads out now in various calibers.. But velocity junkies and energy junkies wont let these debates be what they are. .357 Sig and .40 are about the same as Im concerned.
You're exactly right. I was a cop in the 70's when the energy junkies told us that .38 110 grain +P+ was better than .45.

They were fucking wrong then, and they got cops killed. The same morons are still out there. waving energy charts, and ignoring the mechanism of how handgun bullets work.

News flash...... Your pistol pokes holes in things. If it pokes a deep enough hole to hit important things, and you hit in the right place, it may do what you need it to. If that hole is permanently bigger around all the way through, so much the better.

And all the "energy dump" and "energy transfer" you want to imagine occurs won't change that.

User avatar
ashwednesday
* * * * *
Posts: 1048
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:25 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: 28 Days Later, Zombieland, Dawn of the Dead remake, Shaun of the Dead
Location: Minnesota
Contact:

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by ashwednesday » Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:48 pm

My understanding is that .357 Sig was preferred no just due to terminal ballistics but for being faster / flatter shooting over distance, like 7.62 Tok.
"Flawlessly". Every time I see this word in a thread, I brace myself for bullshit. Around half the time I end up feeling vindicated.

Cryogaijin
*
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 2:09 am

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Cryogaijin » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:47 pm

I'm still a fan of the 10mm for pretty much all the reasons people are fans of the .357.

Faster round, bigger holes, better performance. And 15 round capacity. There's a reason I use a 10mm Witness as my backup bear gun.

User avatar
400 Grains
* * * * *
Posts: 1110
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 11:30 pm

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by 400 Grains » Wed Nov 21, 2012 3:13 am

ashwednesday wrote:My understanding is that .357 Sig was preferred no just due to terminal ballistics but for being faster / flatter shooting over distance, like 7.62 Tok.
It hasn't been preferred by very many.

It's terminal ballistics are similar to .40. The fact that it shoots a couple inches flatter at 100 yards, isn't going to be a big factor for most.

User avatar
Czechnology
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 9341
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 10:50 pm
Location: PDX-ish

Re: .357 SIG vs. .40 S&W vs. .357 magnum

Post by Czechnology » Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:03 am

400 Grains wrote:
ashwednesday wrote:My understanding is that .357 Sig was preferred no just due to terminal ballistics but for being faster / flatter shooting over distance, like 7.62 Tok.
It hasn't been preferred by very many.
And that right there sums up .357SIG for me. I thought it was awesome when it came out, but it just hasn't gained enough traction for me to be able to afford it, and I've never seen testing that made it look better enough for me to care unless it cheapens up a whole hell of a lot.
Nothing is ever what it seems, but everything is exactly what it is.
Vicarious_Lee wrote:If Nutnfacny were an 8-ounce chicken fried steak, he'd come with 72 ounces of batter around it that you have to slash through to get to it.

Post Reply

Return to “Handguns”