.357 Sig, Can't find info

[Suwannee Tim]

I bought a SIG P226 in 40 because I had picked up so much brass at the range it made sense. I love the oddball stuff and the 357 SIG certainly fits that bill. I located 5K pieces of once fired brass for a good price and that in hand bought a 357 SIG barrel. If I had not found a large cheap lot of brass or had to buy factory ammo there is no way I would own this caliber. Too expensive and, other that the different factor, I don't see what is to be gained over 40. A little less recoil maybe but more blast. It is more powerful than 9mm, by a pretty good margin, Speer shows a 9mm 125 at 1050 fps 364 ftlb and and a 357 SIG 124 at 1350 fps and 506 ftlb, which is a 40% increase. That's enough difference to make a difference.

I've shot feral hogs and loose windshields with both heavy and mid-weight 9mm JHPs(Ranger Ts and Speer GDHPs), and with .357sig(GDHP), and have yet to see a difference beteen the 2 cartridges......

I've shot squirrels with 22 LR and with 30-06 and both cartridges kill them stone dead so I don't see much difference between the two.

Seriously, 40% is enough difference to make a difference, if you have a solution to the ammo cost issue.

[Fail-Safe]

And if ft lbs of energy in a handgun round meant a thing when it comes to wounding, you'd have a point. Unfortunately it doesnt.....

[Suwannee Tim]

And if ft lbs of energy in a handgun round meant a thing when it comes to wounding, you'd have a point. Unfortunately it doesnt.....

You are saying energy means nothing? 'Cause it does mean something. It does not tell the whole story, no single measure does, but it does mean something. If energy means nothing, pray tell, what measure does mean something?

[Fail-Safe]

Depth of penetration.

Expansion.


Thats it. Take for instance Winchester Ranger Talon. The 125gr .357sig is going to have more FPE, but the the 147gr 9mm load is going to eat its lunch with regards to penetration and expansion.

And now I will refer you to this report, please read it:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

[Suwannee Tim]

Depth of penetration.

Expansion.


Thats it. Take for instance Winchester Ranger Talon. The 125gr .357sig is going to have more FPE, but the the 147gr 9mm load is going to eat its lunch with regards to penetration and expansion.

And now I will refer you to this report, please read it:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

I have read the FBI report several times as have most informed shooters. The single most important point of this paper is the desirability of adequate penetration. The problem with penetration and expansion as measures of effectiveness is that they have to be determined experimentally at considerable cost. I am not aware of anyone who has measured penetration and expansion of a large number of bullets so these measures are less useful because the numbers do not exist. When you claim that penetration and expansion of the 147 grain 9mm is superior to the 125 grain 357 SIG, it is purely speculation on your part unless you have test results on the 357 SIG and then you need to specify the bullet. I wouldn't compare 125 grain 357 to 147 grain 9mm, I would compare 147 to 147. The beauty of the energy measure is the ease with which it can be calculated. Reliable statistics on penetration and expansion may some day be available for many bullets and loads, until then, energy is a useful, if limited measure.

[WillBrink]

I have read the FBI report several times as have most informed shooters. The single most important point of this paper is the desirability of adequate penetration.

If that were the major concern, FMJ would be recommended.

The problem with penetration and expansion as measures of effectiveness is that they have to be determined experimentally at considerable cost. I am not aware of anyone who has measured penetration and expansion of a large number of bullets so these measures are less useful because the numbers do not exist.

What do you mean by "large numbers"? When a large PD, or fed agency, or mil, etc are testing ammo via established protocols, do you think they use one box? Are you under the impression the variability between lots of ammo by reputable makers of ammo varies so much only X number tested is accurate?

When you claim that penetration and expansion of the 147 grain 9mm is superior to the 125 grain 357 SIG, it is purely speculation on your part unless you have test results on the 357 SIG and then you need to specify the bullet.

There's no lack of testing of major brands, bullet weights, etc, etc. A look at the various postings by Dr Roberts here, with various cites to yet more testing by he and others exists.

I wouldn't compare 125 grain 357 to 147 grain 9mm, I would compare 147 to 147. The beauty of the energy measure is the ease with which it can be calculated.

Easy calculations - that have essentially no use compared to established protocols regarding terminal ballistics - are easy, and of little value to actual terminal ballistics when discussing handgun rnds.

Reliable statistics on penetration and expansion may some day be available for many bullets and loads, until then, energy is a useful, if limited measure.

I think those particularly knowledgeable about this topic will not agree with the above. I could be wrong...

[Fail-Safe]

I am not aware of anyone who has measured penetration and expansion of a large number of bullets so these measures are less useful because the numbers do not exist.

I'm aware of many people who have "measured penetration and expansion of a large number of bullets". In fact this particular section is moderated by one of those persons.

When you claim that penetration and expansion of the 147 grain 9mm is superior to the 125 grain 357 SIG, it is purely speculation on your part unless you have test results on the 357 SIG and then you need to specify the bullet.

Basically you want me to do the leg work for you. OK, you caught me at a good time, I'm kinda bored and your posts arent making any sense, so I'll help you out.

http://www.winchester.com/SiteCollec...law_bullit.swf

Click on that link. In the pull down menu I want you to select 9mm "T" Series(147gr Ranger T), 9mm+P "T" Series(124gr+P Ranger T), 9mm+P+ "T" Series(127gr+P+), and .357sig "T" Series(.357sig Ranger T).

The link will allow you to compare those 4 rounds. Tell me what you see.

I wouldn't compare 125 grain 357 to 147 grain 9mm, I would compare 147 to 147. The beauty of the energy measure is the ease with which it can be calculated.

I merely compared the loads because you claimed FPE was everything. All I did was prove to you that FPE isnt a wounding factor, and that a round with less FPE can, and does, offer far superior terminal ballistics.

You like energy because you are lazy. You want a mathematical equation to yield real world examples. It doesnt happen that way.

Reliable statistics on penetration and expansion may some day be available for many bullets and loads, until then, energy is a useful, if limited measure.

River Tim, stop posting so much and start reading. You dont have to go far either. Pertinent info can be found on this very site, in this very forum, in the "stickied" selections at the top.

Sorry but your are 100% inaccurate in regards to this topic.

[Ed L.]

http://www.winchester.com/SiteCollec...law_bullit.swf

Wow, the 147 grain Ranger T 9mm does outperform the .357 Sig in penetration and matches it if not exceeds it in expansion. It also does as well as the 9m +P and +P+ loads.

It may be worth a switch to the 147 grain ranger from the +P and the +P+ versions as it is less recoil and muzzle jump which means a faster shot to shot recovery time.

[Longhorn]

Speer shows a 9mm 125 at 1050 fps 364 ftlb and and a 357 SIG 124 at 1350 fps and 506 ftlb, which is a 40% increase. That's enough difference to make a difference.

Your bullet weights are backwards, but your #s are right otherwise...

Another thing to make note of with Speer (least on the LE side) there's 2 357 Sig loads - the 54234 and 53918 (majority of the 20 round boxes are 23918). The 53918 is the same load used by the TX DPS, NC SHP and US Secret Service.

The one being quoted is the 2/53918. And yes, it makes a difference as I've never seen anything showing the 54234 is a "better" load even though it's got more velocity and energy than the 53918.

[Fail-Safe]

Why are people saying that USSS is using the Speer GDHP in .357sig? Did they change recently? There are some Treasury folks that have been in the local cop shop, and they still have Rangers.

As for the other .357sig carry load from Speer, it has more penetration at the cost of less expansion. .55 as opposed to .63.