357 sig

[Saab1911]

Notice that I didn't say 357 sig vs Caliber X. So, don't accuse me of starting
another caliber war, please.

I don't understand the reasoning behind the 357 sig. The Secret Service
carries it so that they can punch through car doors and jam up engine
blocks. And 357 sig with the right bullet will punch through some tissue
paper bullet proof vests.

But why does a civilian need one? A Grizzly bear will just laugh at a 357 sig,
and for handgun hunting, revolvers are better options in the 44 Mag variety
or even semi-auto chambered in 10mm could be an option.

It has been often stated that the 357 sig is the answer to a question that
nobody asked. That may not be fair, but I don't think any civilian asked
the question.

If a bad guy busting into your house is wearing body armor, he is likely going
to be armed to the teeth, maybe with ill-gotten automatic weapons. If you
have ****** off the mob so much so that they send a commando unit after
you, I really don't think 357 sig is going to untangle your situation for you.

And, if your estranged wife is trying to drive off in your Cadillac and your
name is Richard Pryor, you can shoot out the engine with your 357 magnum
revolver.

So, unless you're a Secret Service agent or you are in a SWAT team and your
back-up weapon is chambered in 357 sig, I don't see a situation where 357 sig
fits the need that is not met by other calibers, particularly the 357 magnum.

cheers,

Jae

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Hey! You told me .357sig was a solid choice!


I like the .357 for ballistics reason. It is more or less equal to those "other" calibers for SD effectiveness. However, for other purposes, like "long" range shooting it has a flatness the .40/.45 can't come close too. Many are going to yell about the ridiculousness of worrying about the ballistics of a handgun at 100yds, and thats for you to decide on your own, the importance is personal preference but the numbers are unarguable.


In a nutshell. Why .357sig? Because, to me, overall it's the best available. So why not carry the best. I don't believe in overkill, over penetration yes, overkill, no.

 

[xrocket]

If I were you ...

... I would just move on down the road.

You have strung together, anecdotal events, conjecture, ifs, ands and buts for what?

IMO ... borderline troll.

 

[Saab1911]

... I would just move on down the road.

You have strung together, antidotes, conjecture, ifs, ands and buts for what?

IMO ... borderline troll.

I'm sorry sir. I don't have any antidotes for you. If you have recently
been bitten by a snake or a poisonous scorpion, please consult your physician.

 

[Saab1911]

Hey! You told me .357sig was a solid choice!

I like the .357 for ballistics reason. It is more or less equal to those "other" calibers for SD effectiveness. However, for other purposes, like "long" range shooting it has a flatness the .40/.45 can't come close too. Many are going to yell about the ridiculousness of worrying about the ballistics of a handgun at 100yds, and thats for you to decide on your own, the importance is personal preference but the numbers are unarguable.

In a nutshell. Why .357sig? Because, to me, overall it's the best available. So why not carry the best. I don't believe in overkill, over penetration yes, overkill, no.

357 sig is a solid choice. I considered getting a pistol in that
chambering as well. But I figured that since I already own pistols in 357
magnum, 9mm and 45 ACP, there really isn't a real niche that either the 357
sig or the 40 S&W would fill.

But as your very first handgun, 357 sig is a good choice. Having 357 magnum
in an auto-pistol is an attractive proposition.

I just feel that 357 magnum in a longer barrelled revolver (6" and longer) is
a little more versatile.

Cheers,

Jae

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I just feel that 357 magnum in a longer barrelled revolver (6" and longer) is
a little more versatile.

Mmmm... Shiny.


Sadly, the only .357sig that looks good is a $2000 1911 AND worse, it seems to be the ONLY 1911 .357.

... I would just move on down the road.

You have strung together, antidotes, conjecture, ifs, ands and buts for what?

IMO ... borderline troll.

What's with this guy? Geesh.

 

[rhgunguy]

As a bottleneck cartidge it does have an inherent advantage in reliability in an auto that some may find attractive.

9mm +P ammo does just about equal the balistics of the .357 sig, but as a flat shooter it is beat.

.45, 10mm and .40 will all punch through car doors with equal or better performance but 10mm is hard to come by anymore and everyone has a .40 and/or a .45.

I personaly want a Sig in .357 Sig because it is something different.

It is not to be argued that .357 sig is the have all, end all cartidge. You can get a .40 with the same capacity or a 9mm +P with more capacity and similar short-range balistics.

I don't see a situation where 357 sig fits the need that is not met by other calibers, particularly the 357 magnum.

Some people just like it. Who are you to say the civilians have no reason to own it? What is your question? Why are you here? The fact is that you just made a statment that is readily turned about upon itself:I don't see a situation where .40 S&W fits the need that is not met by other calibers, particularly the .357 Sig.


To me this sounds no diffenent than the arguments that eco-people make against things they do not like, such as SUVs.

 

[Wiskey_33]

A solid choice for what? What are you using the pistol for?

Having 357 magnum in an auto-pistol is an attractive proposition.

the .357 SIG does not match the power from the .357 Magnum.

In a nutshell. Why .357sig? Because, to me, overall it's the best available. So why not carry the best.

Try the 10mm if you want a flat shooting, powerful round. It's a reach to call the .357 SIG "the best." But calling any round "the best" is just plain dumb.

 

[45_Shooter]

Many are going to yell about the ridiculousness of worrying about the ballistics of a handgun at 100yds, and thats for you to decide on your own, the importance is personal preference but the numbers are unarguable.

I'd be surprised if any of the handguns chambered in .357 Sig are accurate enough to pattern very well or have sights capable of shooting at 100 yards. I'll shoot S&W revolvers at 100 yards+ and can pull some decent patterns out of them, even with drop-like-a-rock .38's (they will usually bounce off a 2x4 at this range instead of stick in it - how's that for knockdown?).

Service guns' sights are not crisp enough for this kind of distance, and the accuracy isn't there either, so I really don't think long range performance matters much in a service gun.

Penetration would be interesting if they started letting some steel core stuff out though....

 

[Saab1911]

Some people just like it. Who are you to say the civilians have no reason to own it? What is your question? Why are you here? The fact is that you just made a statment that is readily turned about upon itself:I don't see a situation where .40 S&W fits the need that is not met by other calibers, particularly the .357 Sig.

Why am I here? I want to learn from wise souls such as peetzakilla and
yourself. And I learn by asking questions, stating my assumptions and
thinking through things out loud. If my assumptions or logic is flawed, others
will point that out to me. Then, I learn and improve my reasoning skills.

 

[rhgunguy]

I'd be surprised if any of the handguns chambered in .357 Sig are accurate enough to pattern very well or have sights capable of shooting at 100 yards.

I shot my M&P .40 compact at an IPSC target-shaped steel plate at 100 yards. My first two shots were close enough that I would wince if I were the guy that po'ed me enough to get me throwing shots at him at 100 yards to begin with. The 3rd through 5th shots all gonged once I had my point of aim figured out.

 

[Saab1911]

I'd be surprised if any of the handguns chambered in .357 Sig are accurate enough to pattern very well or have sights capable of shooting at 100 yards. I'll shoot S&W revolvers at 100 yards+

At those ranges, aren't handgun rounds like artillery shells with a ballistic trajectory?

 

[rhgunguy]

One question down, two to go.

Who are you to say the civilians have no reason to own it? What is your question?

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Try the 10mm if you want a flat shooting, powerful round. It's a reach to call the .357 SIG "the best." But calling any round "the best" is just plain dumb.

Because, to me, overall it's the best available. So why not carry the best.

Only to me my friend, you can carry and like and hate whatever you want or don't want.

I do kind of like the 10mm, although it is essentially a flat shooting .40, being .394 caliber.
I am less certain of it's long term availability. I could be wrong and thats not the only reason for not looking more strongly at the 10mm.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

...wise souls such as peetzakilla...

Uh, you might be in the wrong place.... Yikes.

 

[Saab1911]

One question down, two to go.

Quote:
Who are you to say the civilians have no reason to own it? What is your question?

A1: I have no authority to dictate to anybody else. I simply asked
a question. This is a free country. Anybody can shoot whatever they want.

A2: The question is, what would a civilian want to do with a pistol chambered
in 357 sig that he can't do just as well with other chamberings. Peetzakilla
answered this question pretty well in the very first response.

 

[xrocket]

Thank you...

... for pointing out the error of my ways.

"You have strung together, anecdotal events, conjecture, ifs, ands and buts for what?"

The question still stands.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

At those ranges, aren't handgun rounds like artillery shells with a ballistic trajectory?

Nope. As I recall the .357 sighted in 4ish inches high @ 50 is about 1 inche low at 100. The .40 meanwhile is like 5 or 6 inches low.


Again, this is only a property of the projectile and may or may not be a valid concern in any individuals mind.

How's that for a disclaimer?

 

[Saab1911]

The question still stands.

You're not the boss of me. I'm weird in that I'm only polite to those
who are polite to me.

And if you're bothered by my threads, don't read them.

 

[Wiskey_33]

All I can say on the .357 SIG is yea, it sounds like a good round, as did the .45 GAP.

I'll keep shooting my .45 ACP, .40 S&W, .38 +P's, and .357 MAG, and ya'll can have the rest, but save me some 9mm since I'm picking my P7 up on Friday!