Shot Show 2022

[SteyrAUG]

I see from your profile pic you are late for a meeting with The Bobs so I will keep this short

Definitely could have worded it better concerning the +P+ I should have said advancements in that load put it on par with the 357SIG. Think Buffalo Bore pushing 500 ft lbs at 1400 fps or so comes to mind with an expansion over .50. Underwood was another one.

As for adoption, who else other than HK, Glock and Sig chambered in that round (that's an honest question because I don't recall.) HKs were impossible to find (I put conversion barrel in my USP 40 and recall it was like finding a unicorn.) I had to special order my G32 and G33 (which I carried both for years) as none of my LGS's stocked the caliber. I think the only one I saw in a gun case on a regular basis was the Sig. I do think the more realistic route people took to sample that round was putting conversion barrels in their current 40 cal guns but thats just a guess on my part.

Given the 40 came out in 1990 in large part due to the FBI looking for a more powerful carry round after the 86 Miami shootout I think it was a foregone conclusion when they adopted it as the "solution" to the underpowered 9mm that the public and manufacturers were going to follow suit. Especially Glock who I believe had the FBI contract back then? Followed by PDs across the country. Essentially I am agreeing with you but also think, at least for me, the ballistic advantage shrunk over time due to round development which made the additional cost of the 357 SIG not worth it for someone like me and my buddies who like to shoot a lot. For the guy who carries and then only takes it out for practice once a year? Not so much. I see the same thing happening with this cartridge.

Well here is the first problem, 9mm +P+ isn't meant for most handguns. It's a subgun round that destroys handguns so it doesn't really put it on par with .357 SIG which is designed to function with that round.

Minor nit pick, FBI actually went 10mm after the 86 shootout. Both the .357 SIG and the .40 were scaled down versions of the 10mm because everyone felt the 10mm was too much and for whatever reason the .40 won the "vhs vs beta" war. Ironically a nearly identical cartridge .41 Action Express was developed by IMI mid 80s and was completely ignored by everyone. The .41 AE might be superior to all of them but nobody was paying attention.

And yeah, for lots of reasons people played "wait and see" with both the .40 and the .357 SIG. I had no trouble getting a USP compact in .357 SIG. At the time all of these calibers were sorta like 10mm and exotics. If PDs across the country all went with Glock in .357 SIG that would have been the standard, but I think being a hotter round when it came to "everyone" being able to qualify, people decided to go with the .40 S&W and it's not a terrible round or anything. There was the issue of unsupported chambers in .40 Glocks but that is a design problem with the Glock and not a problem with the round.

And for the record, and just so you don't think this is serious debate, I carry 9mm almost exclusively.

[Alaskapopo]

So to start 9mm +P+ existed long before anyone dreamed up .357 SIG. Then .357SIG has much higher muzzle velocities than .40, the fastest .40 can't catch the slowest .357 SIG. Additionally HK and several other manufacturers chambered for the .357 SIG.

It was the fact that the Glock in .40 was adopted in huge numbers that let it own the market over .357 SIG and 10mm and not the actual ballistic performance. They were also all three being driven on the civilian side my a 10 round magazine limitation law.

Just a minor correction the fastest 40s did out run the heavy bullet 357 sigs (135 grain 40 vs 150 grain 357 sig) in fact if bullet weight was kept equal the 40 had a slight edge comparing 150 grain bullets to 155 grain bullets.
Pat

[SteyrAUG]

Just a minor correction the fastest 40s did out run the heavy bullet 357 sigs (135 grain 40 vs 150 grain 357 sig) in fact if bullet weight was kept equal the 40 had a slight edge comparing 150 grain bullets to 155 grain bullets.
Pat

I though the .357 SIG had a lot more powder charge behind it?

Wasn't that one of the factors that led to LE adopting the .40 because .357 SIG was more prone to over penetration?

[WillBrink]

So to start 9mm +P+ existed long before anyone dreamed up .357 SIG. Then .357SIG has much higher muzzle velocities than .40, the fastest .40 can't catch the slowest .357 SIG. Additionally HK and several other manufacturers chambered for the .357 SIG.

It was the fact that the Glock in .40 was adopted in huge numbers that let it own the market over .357 SIG and 10mm and not the actual ballistic performance. They were also all three being driven on the civilian side my a 10 round magazine limitation law.

As you said, that i was gonna say, 9mm +p+ existed a long time before the .357 Sig. The .357 Sig was not designed to fill any gaps per se. There's a reason it, like some others that had a short run, are called a "solution in search of a problem." It didn't solve any problems, didn't fill any gaps, and rode on the .357 Mags rep as a man stopper, which didn't apply to modern JHPs. I believe the only place .357 Sig remained in use, perhaps still in use (?) was among state troopers as it did perform well against intermediate barriers that troopers more likely to deal with (e.g. car windshields etc) compared to other rnds tested at the time.

[Alaskapopo]

357 SIG was developed to cover a gap between the 9mm and the 40. Which it did for a brief period of time until 9mm +P+ hit the scene. Much in the same way the 30 Super Carry is trying to cover the gap between 380 and 9mm. I loved the 357 SIG for a brief period of time but eventually went back to 9mm. As a side note I also think the branding, defining it as a SIG cartridge, also did not help its overall adoption. If they had called it the 9mm Magnum it would have grown some legs. Nobody (except Glock) wants to cross brand their models based on caliber.

With respect no the 357 was not meant to fill the gap between the 9mm and 40. It was marketed to give 357 magnum performance into a semi auto pistol. The Evan Marshall research was popular back then and the idea is it would sell. In reality its more like a 9mm +p++.
Pat

[pinzgauer]

With respect no the 357 was not meant to fill the gap between the 9mm and 40. It was marketed to give 357 magnum performance into a semi auto pistol.

Which was an admirable goal, I spent a decade trying to do just that in the late 70s and early 80s with 38 super and then later 41 AE.

When 10 mm went more mainstream in the mid-80s and Delta Elites fell from favor I picked one up and shot 10 mm since.

I was looking for 357 performance in a commander size package. 357 SIG delivers that in a 9 mm pistol format, which is pretty cool.

I do believe the mainstreaming of quality +P 9 mm loadings made the step up to 357 sig not worth the change for most. Especially agencies.

[Alaskapopo]

Which was an admirable goal, I spent a decade trying to do just that in the late 70s and early 80s with 38 super and then later 41 AE.

When 10 mm went more mainstream in the mid-80s and Delta Elites fell from favor I picked one up and shot 10 mm since.

I was looking for 357 performance in a commander size package. 357 SIG delivers that in a 9 mm pistol format, which is pretty cool.

I do believe the mainstreaming of quality +P 9 mm loadings made the step up to 357 sig not worth the change for most. Especially agencies.

What made me drop the caliber was comparing the 357 Sig at the time to the 9mm rounds and only seeing about 100 to 150 fps speed advantage and no real penetration or expansion advantage at that point I dropped it and went 9mm. There was also annoying problems like less feed reliability due to the bottle neck design in some platforms despite advertising to the contrary. The round was prone to nose diving on the feed ramp. There were also issues with bullet set back due to limited neck tension.

[CRAMBONE]

Mars Inc. (never heard of them) but I don’t think they know what recoil is if they think a long stroke is going to have less felt recoil.)

https://youtu.be/h_ymleH_e3A

[1168]

357 SIG was developed to cover a gap between the 9mm and the 40. Which it did for a brief period of time until 9mm +P+ hit the scene. Much in the same way the 30 Super Carry is trying to cover the gap between 380 and 9mm. I loved the 357 SIG for a brief period of time but eventually went back to 9mm. As a side note I also think the branding, defining it as a SIG cartridge, also did not help its overall adoption. If they had called it the 9mm Magnum it would have grown some legs. Nobody (except Glock) wants to cross brand their models based on caliber.

I’m not convinced its trying to fill a gap between .380 and 9mm. Its a 50,000psi cartridge with the same overall length as 9mm. It is only going to work in weapons that are suitable for 9mm because of those two things. The goal appears to be to simply add ammo capacity without losing energy. More like what the 10mm would do to compete with .45. than what the .357Sig did to compete with 9mm or .40.

Just speculation.

Edit: my point is just that while both of the sentences I pointed out make perfect sense, their proximity confused me. Wasn’t meant to be argumentative.

Mars Inc. (never heard of them) but I don’t think they know what recoil is if they think a long stroke is going to have less felt recoil.)

https://youtu.be/h_ymleH_e3A

Thanks.

[1986s4]

I would rather see our manufactures dedicate themselves to making more ammo and primers at less than stupid prices.