Why I chose this caliber...

High Q · Feb 12, 2010

When I trust my life to a round, I want it to be the best one available. I want to make sure that it does it's intended job. That's why I chose the 357 sig. Here is why--

Sure the 45 has proven itself, but some consider it antiquated. Plus, its size limits the magazine capacity.

The 40 is a variation of the 45 and it is also effective and a good choice, but it lacks the punch of the 357 sig, by a long shot.

The 9mm is also a proven round, but most agree that you need a "hot" 9 for it to really be effective. (Interestingly, the 357 sig is the hottest 9 available)

Some call the 357 sig a round without a purpose. These are the same people that have never shot it. I make the arguement that it combines the best of the 9mm and 40.

Most agree that shot placement is what is important. That is true, but the ability to get off the second and third round quickly while staying on target is just as important. That is why rounds that kick like a mule such as the 357mag or 44mag are not as effective. They take the gun so far off target most seconds shots are missses.

Some say that the 357 sig recoils too much. In my experience it is more managable than the 40 in side-by-side comparisons. It is almost as easy to remain on target as the 9mm. And because that is true, why shoot the 40 when the 357sig is easier to handle, and why shoot the 9 when the 357sig is more devasting?

When you take this round to the range and fire one off, most people will turn and ask what that was. It packs a wallop, but is easy to control. In fact most agree that it is the most accurate and reliable (there are never feed issues) of the handgun rounds.

Drawbacks? Sure, it may cost a little more, but practice with the cheap stuff or with the similiar feeling 40. But when my life is in danger I want the very best. I want a round that no one with argue that it is devasting. That is why I chose the 357 sig.

People that shoot it, swear by it. I know that I do. You?

ALBY · Feb 12, 2010

the main drawback is that ammo is going to disappear for this caliber as it is not widely used, nor will it ever be.

buy all the brass and projectiles you can. you are going to need them.

hole punch · Feb 12, 2010

that's why i roll with 10mm ultra mag

grb · Feb 12, 2010

.45 ACP is "Antiquated"...hmmm...I hope they don't stop manufacturing it anytime soon. :innocent0

thechainrule · Feb 12, 2010

Correct me if im wrong but I do believe this round was actually developed for shooting through windshields more accurately. The small caliber faster moving round is less effected when passing through angled glass. If you look at a car after a police shoot out, if the officer used his weapon on the windshield with a .40 you will typically see bullet holes in the dashboard.

At the same time the round does have good stopping power. The round is trusted by many officers serving now. So I do agree with you.

Ide love to own a weapon in .357 sig but the ammo is too pricey for me. What do you typically spend on target load/ practice load?

JSW · Feb 12, 2010

High Q said:
Sure the 45 has proven itself, but some consider it antiquated. Plus, its size limits the magazine capacity.

I believe the 45 will be with us for a long time to come, and there are a number of 45's out there today that hold 12+ rounds in standard length mags.

It could just be that I am old school ( yea I'm old too ) and most action that you will take as a civilian can be handled with a revolver ( six shots ) so a 1911 45 with eight is enough. Just to let you know I would carry either 357 magnum or a 45 and feel equally protected against two legged critters

Ethan83 · Feb 12, 2010

High Q said:
Sure the 45 has proven itself, but some consider it antiquated.

...Really? Antiquated implies that it's "out-of-date". I think that actually, the fact that it has been used consistently in service for longer than just about any cartridge ever devised is more of a testament to what an excellent round it is. Y'know, that whole "ain't broke, don't fix it" thing. And, with some of the modern polymer pistols like the G21, XD45, FNP45, etc, I don't think capacity is really an issue. I know there are even doublestack 1911s out there. If 13 or more rounds of 45ACP hasn't solved your problem, you shouldn't have used a handgun.

Oh, and the fact that it's an exceptionally loud handgun round is not a plus, and I think should actively be considered as a negative when considering a defensive weapon. Loud bangs and bright flashes don't exactly help maintain control in what can be assumed to be an already highly stressful situation. Otherwise, everyone would port their carry pistols - but they don't.

Nothin wrong with a .357sig - I'm pretty sure there a bunch of police departments in MD that use it. I've personally fantasized about an XDm .40 with drop-in barrels in 357 and 9x19.

But if you wanna go the "small n fast" route, why not consider a Tokarev? Super cheap gun, super cheap ammo, and very slim if you want to carry it.

joppaj · Feb 12, 2010

You make an eloquant statement for the round, although I disagree with your conclusions. Another board member here once described the .357Sig as "All the stopping power of a 9mm+p with the magazine capacity of a .40". I tend to agree with that assesment. For me, I simply learned to deal with the extra recoil of the .40 and prefer to punch bigger holes in my target.

I would also disagree with your assesment that the .357mag isn't as effective. Once again, I learned to deal with the recoil and the heavy DA trigger pull to harness the vicious stopping power of that round. On a final note, anyone that considers the .45acp "antiquated" is frankly a fool. Yes, it's an old design, but it's still an appalingly effective one.

So, I'm glad you enjoy your .357Sig. The ability to sell new guns to people in different calibres helps drive the market. It also means you and I won't be scrounging for the same ammo at the gunshow. Glad it works for you, but nothing I can't live without.

High Q said:
The 40 is a variation of the 45 and it is also effective and a good choice, but it lacks the punch of the 357 sig, by a long shot.

Actually the .40S&W is a down loaded 10mm.

PoPo3 · Feb 12, 2010

High Q said:
The 40 is a variation of the 45 and it is also effective and a good choice, but it lacks the punch of the 357 sig, by a long shot.

I had this same argument with a friend that thought I should've bought a .357 sig instead of a 40. If you look at the ballistics of 40 vs. .357 sig, depending on the bullet weight, the .40 is not much behind the sig round. Speer Personal defense ammo shows a muzzle energy of 496 ft/lbs with the 40 and 506 ft/lbs with the sig. That's less than a 2% energy advantage with the speer rounds...long shot??? I'm not so sure.

hole punch · Feb 12, 2010

If the .45 is antiquated, the 9mm must be down right ancient. :innocent0

boss66tcode · Feb 12, 2010

So have the best of both worlds guys, practice at the range with a .40, go home change out barrels in the glock or sig (You'll need to clean it anyway), and keep .357 sig in a couple of mags for the zombies. I see it as a win/win proposition.

Crxflippr · Feb 12, 2010

High Q said:
I want to make sure that it does it's intended job.

What is the intended job? I'm assuming to stop an attacker, but were you looking at something more specific?

High Q said:
Sure the 45 has proven itself, but some consider it antiquated. Plus, its size limits the magazine capacity.

If it's proven, then doesn't that mean it does it's intended job? For being obsolete there sure are a lot of people that use it. Other than being old, what makes this round out dated? Specifics? Data? Your mag capacity point has some merit, but is that it?

High Q said:
The 40 is a variation of the 45 and it is also effective and a good choice, but it lacks the punch of the 357 sig, by a long shot.

Data?

High Q said:
The 9mm is also a proven round, but most agree that you need a "hot" 9 for it to really be effective.

Again proven but doesn't do it's intended job? Who are these "most" that are agreeing?

High Q said:
I make the arguement that it combines the best of the 9mm and 40.

What are these "best" attributes? So far we have less argument, and more opinion.

High Q said:
Most agree that shot placement is what is important. That is true, but the ability to get off the second and third round quickly while staying on target is just as important. That is why rounds that kick like a mule such as the 357mag or 44mag are not as effective. They take the gun so far off target most seconds shots are missses.

Some say that the 357 sig recoils too much. In my experience it is more managable than the 40 in side-by-side comparisons. It is almost as easy to remain on target as the 9mm. And because that is true, why shoot the 40 when the 357sig is easier to handle, and why shoot the 9 when the 357sig is more devasting?

What are they being shot out of? Length of barrel? Opinions, no data...

High Q said:
When you take this round to the range and fire one off, most people will turn and ask what that was. It packs a wallop, but is easy to control. In fact most agree that it is the most accurate and reliable (there are never feed issues) of the handgun rounds.

Then why isn't it more popular? If in "fact" (a verifiable truth) "most" (that would be more than 50%, right?) people think it's so great, why in the world do any of us have anything else? Oh, and they NEVER have feed issues? Out of any gun?

High Q said:
Drawbacks? Sure, it may cost a little more, but practice with the cheap stuff or with the similiar feeling 40. But when my life is in danger I want the very best. I want a round that no one with argue that it is devasting. That is why I chose the 357 sig.

People that shoot it, swear by it. I know that I do. You?

So... honestly, I'm not trying to give you or the 357 sig a hard time. From your approach it appeared you wanted to write a serious persuasive piece on the 357 sig. I get that, I think. However, as it stands, it seems you got over excited and left out some details that will help push your point across. Address the issues I pointed out and it should hopefully strengthen your argument.

NateTheShake · Feb 12, 2010

High Q said:
Sure the 45 has proven itself, but some consider it antiquated. Plus, its size limits the magazine capacity.

Antiquated how? It's a lower-pressure cartridge, but it can still push a very heavy (comparably) projectile at a good speed. 185 grain is a "small" bullet for this caliber.

The 40 is a variation of the 45 and it is also effective and a good choice, but it lacks the punch of the 357 sig, by a long shot.

.40 S&W is actually a variation of the 10mm auto. The 10mm proved too be "too hot" for limp-wristed girly-men so they cut the case down, loaded it lighter, and called it the .40 S&W.

The 9mm is also a proven round, but most agree that you need a "hot" 9 for it to really be effective. (Interestingly, the 357 sig is the hottest 9 available)

I'd say a 9mm +P+ is still the hottest 9 out there. It all depends on load. Of course the .357 SIG can't go heavier than a 125 grain bullet because it extends past the shoulder of the case. The 9mm can go up to 147 grain and come damn close to supersonic.

Some call the 357 sig a round without a purpose. These are the same people that have never shot it. I make the arguement that it combines the best of the 9mm and 40.

To me it combines the worst of both. Lighter bullet of the 9mm with the capacity of a 40.

Most agree that shot placement is what is important. That is true, but the ability to get off the second and third round quickly while staying on target is just as important. That is why rounds that kick like a mule such as the 357mag or 44mag are not as effective. They take the gun so far off target most seconds shots are missses.

Some say that the 357 sig recoils too much. In my experience it is more managable than the 40 in side-by-side comparisons. It is almost as easy to remain on target as the 9mm. And because that is true, why shoot the 40 when the 357sig is easier to handle, and why shoot the 9 when the 357sig is more devasting?

.357 SIG has always seemed much snappier than .40 and not even on the same plain as 9mm, at least to me. I'm not recoil sensitive and it depends on the platform, but I've never shot one that didn't snap back pretty hard in comparison.

When you take this round to the range and fire one off, most people will turn and ask what that was. It packs a wallop, but is easy to control. In fact most agree that it is the most accurate and reliable (there are never feed issues) of the handgun rounds.

WRONG! My .45 ACP 200 gr LSWC over 4.2 grains of Bullseye loads are freaking tack-drivers. But really, anything can be accurate and I have seen good loads and bad loads out of every single caliber I have shot.

Drawbacks? Sure, it may cost a little more, but practice with the cheap stuff or with the similiar feeling 40. But when my life is in danger I want the very best. I want a round that no one with argue that it is devasting. That is why I chose the 357 sig.

If I were going to consider something like .357 SIG I'd just go all the way to the nuclear 10mm Auto. They're both more expensive, harder to find, and have stout recoil. Why shoot a 125 grain bullet at 1300 when I can shoot a 185 at the same speed? POW!

alucard0822 · Feb 12, 2010

357 sig is the retarded bastard cousin of a worthy round, the 10mm.

10mm was designed to be the ultimate defensive round, 40 cal, 1200fps, 200gr bullet, and exceeding most every service caliber before it, the round trounced every test the FBI could throw at it, all except one, the girl test. Women and girly men found it to be too much, so they neutered it, giving rise to the 40S&W. This round was only a shell of 10mm glory, but still was sufficient to become the most popular modern caliber for police work since the 38 special, and has served with distinction for a couple decades, but like the 9mm and 45ACP chamberings that came before it, criminals simply grew immune to the caliber, and a new solution was needed. Problem was that heavy 40S&W loads are slow, at only 950FPS, there was a fear that a determined criminal could outrun them, or hide behind a peice of glass, sheetmetal, or could armor themselves with a couple layers of tinfoil. Of course the best solution when faced with these threats is to use a smaller bullet, giving rise to the 357sig. Where a full power 124gr 9mm+p at 1,200fps will do nothing more than anger an adversary, the same bullet going 150FPS FASTER supposedly transforms it into the hammer of Thor, it will peirce a car like a lazer beam, and kill any badguy in it's path before they hit the ground.

I :heart:

caliber wars :popcorn:

SCARCQB · Feb 12, 2010

You want hot pistol loads
Try the 9x25 Dillon or the 38-45

The 9x25 is a 10mm Auto cartridge necked down to a 9mm
and the 38-45 is a 45ACP cartridge necked down to 9mm

Now... thats hot

Caliber : 9X25

Bullet : 115gr. Gold Dot, 125gr. Gold Dot, 147gr. Gold Dot

A Glock 20 with a drop in 9x25mm barrel seems like a potent package. Thats if you don'ot mind the muzzle blast and recoil.

Ballistics : 1825fps/ 850 ft.lbs, 1700fps / 802 ft.lbs, 1525fps/ 760 ft.lbs - 6" BarSto

aquaman · Feb 12, 2010

Why do you feel the need to justify your choice of caliber?

NateTheShake · Feb 12, 2010

alucard0822 said:
Where a full power 124gr 9mm+p at 1,200fps will do nothing more than anger an adversary, the same bullet going 150FPS FASTER supposedly transforms it into the hammer of Thor, it will peirce a car like a lazer beam, and kill any badguy in it's path before they hit the ground.

I caliber wars

Yes, but what happens when a 165 grain bullet is going that fast? It must be like that one scene in The Watchmen when Dr. Manhattan is going apes**t on the Viet Cong with his naked blue fury. Nothing left in its wake except for maybe a spinal column and some blood spray.

10mm > Everything.

SCARCQB · Feb 12, 2010

I'm happy with the 9mm . I feel confident that combined with the pistol that I personally chose that I can shoot the thing accurately, efficiently. It will not blind me at night or make my ears ring. I can also practice a lot more with it as ammo is a bit more affordable compared to other larger calibers. As with any gunfight... Shot placement is vital. A hit with a 22LR is better than a miss with a 44 Magnum.

For me, as a rule of thumb... Shoot the handgun with the largest caliber you can manage and afford( 9mm-45ACP) It will also take a lot of practice to get good at it. As a takeaway,Remember that handgun and ammo are just tools. It is your mindset, training and skills that win fights.

joppaj · Feb 12, 2010

SCARCQB said:
I'm happy with the 9mm . I feel confident that combined with the pistol that I personally chose that I can shoot the thing accurately, efficiently.

I can agree with this. I don't personally like the 9mm. However, a co-worker of mine spent years in the Air Force as whatever they call thier MP's. With a Beretta M-9 he was a perfect shooter on qual day and got excellent scores on tac courses as well. It wasn't the biggest gun in the fight but his skill, mindset and experience were going to get him through most fights on top.

Squad40 · Feb 12, 2010

Why I chose this caliber...

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Active Member

Paper Target Slayer

Ultimate Member

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Sheepdog

Active Member

Paper Target Slayer

a bit of an Eddie Haskle

Foolish Mortal

11B

For great Justice

Get Opp my rawn, Plick!

Ultimate Member

11B

Get Opp my rawn, Plick!

Sheepdog

$240 worth of pudding

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics