.357Sig/.357Magnum

[FLA2760]

I am wondering if any of you have terminal ballistic information on the .357sig load out of a 4" such as a Glock32. How does it compare to say a 125gr .357 magnum load out of a 4" revolver? I am considering a G32 for the house and carry when practical. I currently CCW a G27.
I thank you for your replys.

 

[The Tourist]

As debates go into the future, I think this one is going to become the new "9mm vs. .45 ACP" discussion.

As a reloader, my head swims with all of the possible variations of the actual load.

For example, will a locked breech auto provide any bump in FPS over a revolver that leaks up to 15% around the forcing cone? Does it matter? Do tighter modern tolerances make that argument old news?

Do the firearms use the same bullet with the same jacket thickness? Does that matter.

And by "four inch," do you mean the measurement of a revolver barrel alone, or in the auto from firing pin to muzzle?

See what I mean.

In my book, the .357 Mag (especially with the 125 grain bullet) and the 357 SIG are brothers from another mother. They are so different in application and design--launched by two valid platforms--that their performance should be judged from actual data in one-shot stops.

To my way of thinking, a revolver guy is best armed with a .357 Magnum. He's used to it. He practices with it. In turn, an auto guy does the same with the SIG load.

In the final analysis, I want a guy who knows what he's doing.

 

[AK103K]

In my book, the .357 Mag (especially with the 125 grain bullet) and the 357 SIG are brothers from another mother. They are so different in application and design--launched by two valid platforms--that their performance should be judged from actual data in one-shot stops.

To my way of thinking, a revolver guy is best armed with a .357 Magnum. He's used to it. He practices with it. In turn, an auto guy does the same with the SIG load.

There ya go.

I especially like the " brothers from another mother" thing, havent seen it described that way before, but its a very valid statement.


It would also be nice if we can keep this whole thing real, and keep the comparison's apples to apples, as in, comparable weapons and ammo for the use they were designed, not something that "may be" for something else outside the parameters.

 

[xrocket]

Other than the close horsepower of the two, the bullets themselves are virtually the same in most applications. What I do like about the .357sig is it's use in an automatic frame.

It seems to me when comparing wheel to auto in such a high performance load, I personally have better control for the follow up shots as the slide and spring combo absorbs part of the recoil. The direct torque up and back on a wheelie generally takes longer and more effort to reacquire the target over the auto.

I find shooting the .357sig in a heavier gun, such as the Sig 229 auto, to be pleasant, controllable and a lot of fun at the range.

As always, your results will vary.

 

[shepherddogs]

As loaded by the factory there is probably not much difference in the 2 cartridges. The 357 mag isn't loaded anywhere near its potential from the factory these days. 158 grains out of a 6 inch barrel used to run nearly 1500 fps. Now thats closer to 1200. With handloads a 125 grn bullet can easily be propelled 1600 fps+ without excess pressure. The 357 Sig is a pretty good auto cartridge but it aint no 357 mag.

 

[Dogbite]

I used to have a G-32, and while i had it, i shot it quite a bit. I was very impressed with the 357 sig. It was accurate and powerful, also super reliable in the G-32. I did some testing with it vs. my dads Ruger SP101 357 mag. I shot them into phone books and water jugs and such. I don't have actual measurements anymore, but i remember my dad and i digging out the bullets, and measuring back then. This was very unscientific testing of course, but i am totally convinced that the 357 sig equals the 357 mag in the 125 grain loading. I was also able to make several good hits on a B-27 target from 100 yards away with no problem. The 357 sig impressed us both all day long in the testing we undertook.

 

[JohnKSa]

As long as you restrict the comparison to typical loadings available in the 125gr bullets they compare very favorably in terms of velocity/energy.

Do the firearms use the same bullet with the same jacket thickness? Does that matter.

It does matter. I haven't done an exhaustive comparison of bullet performance, but it seems that the .357SIG does use tougher bullets and therefore gives better penetration than the 125gr .357Mag.

 

[sw_florida]

.357 mag

The .357 sig looks interesting, just as the 10mm auto looks interesting. But when I read threads on autos they all seem to crack up in the long run. I have yet to read about a GP100 or a Dan Wesson crack up from .357 mag. The .357 sig is 20% down in energy depostit from the .357 mag, is my estimate. I carry a large frame 4" .357 mag daily. To have one shot stopping power is comforting.

 

[vanilla_gorilla]

I don't know about "one shot stopping power" but I agree that the .357 Sig is only identical to the .357 Mag in current "watered down" loadings. The .357 Sig cannot quite touch the full-power loadings of the Magnum. However, the Sig does have other things in it's favor, particularly increased capacity in autos. Personally, I am also able to fire a well-designed auto much faster than a DA revolver while still getting good hits within the CoM zone.

If all that is to be compared is a single shot, then the Magnum loading has the advantage, but I don't think that really translates as well into the defensive shooting world as many think.

 

[Alnamvet]

Just out of curiosity

has there ever been a 357 magnum auto pistol, and if not, why?

 

[kristop64089]

The Desert Eagle in .357 mag.

And a couple others that escape me right now.


One is an auto revolver.

 

[Alnamvet]

Any reason...

why it's not used in Glocks, 1911's, H&K, et al? Personally, I like the round, and would like to see a Glock designed for it.

 

[JohnKSa]

It's difficult to get rimmed cartridges to feed well from magazines. Also, the .357Mag is a very long cartridge, the few autopistols out I've seen that chambered it were more than just a little on the large side...

 

[Jacobie]

Anyone have a pic of the two next to each other?

 

[zoomie]

not great, but good enough

Here's the best I've found. Comparing a 9mm to both:

9mm vs. 357sig

9mm vs. 357mag

 

[Jacobie]

Thanks Zoomie
It doesn't look that much bigger than the 9mm

 

[AK103K]

It isnt. Its meant to be used in a 9mm sized pistol, just like a .40 S&W, which is basically the same size too. The 357SIG and .40S&W have a fatter case and the mags carry a couple of rounds less.

Heres a pic of them all together. You can easily see why the 357MAG's grip would be a lot longer.

 

[Alnamvet]

Ahhh....

I see now...grip on a Glock 357 mag (should that ever had existed) would have made the G21 grip feel like tiny.

 

[orionengnr]

.357 Pasadena AutoMag, later Hollywood AutoMag. I saw and held one about five years ago at a gun show. Asking price was $1600, and I believe he got it.

They also made an AutoMag chambered in 44 Mag, using (IIRC) a cut-down .308 case. I've only seen pictures of them, and seem to recall an obscure movie, named "Magnum Force" and featuring some little-know actor with a name something like....oh, I forget. Clint Westwood, maybe?