What are the advantages of .357 SIG over .40 S&W?

My P226 is chambered for .40 S&W but could shoot .357 SIG by swapping the barrel.

.40 S&W seems perfect in the P226.
What are the advantages of .357 SIG?

If you reload bullets are cheaper.

It "should" feed more reliably.

If you like it fast, you can drive a light bullet quickly with the sig.

More muzzle blast with sig.

Those are what I can think of off the top of my head. I like the Sig and shoot it a lot out of my 229 sport.

Peter M. Eick said:

If you reload bullets are cheaper.

Click to expand...

But reloading the bottle-necked .357 SIG cartridge is harder than reloading the straight-walled .40 S&W.

I also have a P226 in 40S&W. Can't provide input on the .357 SIG, but I can tell you that 40S&W ammo is CHEAP right now.
I was curious about 357 SIG as well, but apparently it was a phase I was going thru and has since passed.... &^) H.

Why is reloading the bottleneck harder than a 40? I would have said the opposite.

The sig does not have an expander die like the 40. WIth Dillon carbide dies you just ram it through so you have one less die to adjust. I lube with hornady one shot because I use nickle cases but it is unneeded.

Bottleneck cartridges typically have to be trimmed now and then. Straightwall cartridges do not.

I've never loaded the .357s but hear they are a pain in the watusi due to the short neck.

I like some bottlenecks due to their history, such as the .32-20, .38-40, .44-40s, and even the .30 Mauser, and would like to get into the .25NAA, .32NAA or 9mm AE just for their uniqueness. But to me the .357 Sig has nothing to offer over the .40 S&W. They may be more reliable, but I've never had any kind of reliability issues with any of my .40s.

The main attributes to look for in a defensive cartridge is expansion and penetration and going to a lighter and smaller bullet is only a step backwards. If I were going to use it for hunting it might be a different story, but then I'd probably go with a nice revolver anyway.

I watched a guy load a full 15 round magazine with empty .357 Sig brass. He then inserted the mag and proceeded to pull back the slide fifteen times while empties fed into and then ejected with not a single jam. I would say the bottleneck cartridge has the least chance of feed related jamming of the two. Also, some of the loadings for .357 Sig make truth of the original concept of making an auto version of the .357 magnum. If the gun is made strong enough to handle it then it will reproduce some of the warmer 125 gr .357 magnum loadings just fine. The trouble lies in the fact that most of the guns chambered in .357 Sig weren't originally designed for that much recoil. So some of the guns started to eat their frames.

BUT…

With modern bullets and powders there are plenty of 9mm, .40SW, and .45ACP loadings that are testing in ballistics gelatin tests that have penetration and "wound cavity" channels very similar to the 125gr .357 magnum when viewed side by side. So the .357Sig may be doomed if only by a why bother kind of attitude. That is why I think its biggest benefit may be the ease of feeding from a magazine. It does need a proper bullet selection though as not just any 9mm bullet will seat correctly on the short neck.

Oh, and I find the Lee Bottle Neck .357Sig Factory Crimp Die finishes off the loading of this ammo to near perfection.

bushmaster1313 said:

My P226 is chambered for .40 S&W but could shoot .357 SIG by swapping the barrel.

.40 S&W seems perfect in the P226.
What are the advantages of .357 SIG?

Click to expand...

IMHO...... NONE, ZERO, ZILCH... I have limited experience with the rounds, purchased a 357sig, ported barrel for my M&P40.... could find nothing of value after shooting 100 rounds other than a big flame show at the end of my slide.. Loud bang, hard to control muzzle flip, a pain in the butt to load the magazine, ammo was more expensive and harder to find.

The 357SIG is another caliber option. Shooters either like it or hate it. To some it is the end all, to others it is not needed. In addition to the reliable feeding the others have mentioned, the 357SIG round is extremely accurate, flat shooting, and holds its velocity/accuracy with distance. It really shines in barrier penetration. Though not as powerful as the 357 magnum 125gr SJHP, the ballistic gel profile is similar. Recoil wise the actual impulse is less than a 40 S&W. Felt recoil is subjective and highly influenced by the platform. I think some shooters think "357 magnum here comes the recoil" when shooting 357SIG. The actual measured recoil impulse of 357SIG is slightly less than 40. I shoot a lot of both calibers and find the 40 has a tendency to rise and twist. The 357SIG recoil impulse is more straight back and quick. With proper recoil management and practice you can get back on target quickly and shoot the 357SIG fast. This is my observations with working long term with the caliber. Effect wise all of the recognized combat calibers work or fail about the same. The 357SIG has gained an enviable street record in actual shootings. Bill

Seems like a solution to a non problem. But, you get to spent a lot more money when you can find it.
A number of local shooters have purchased a sig barrel for their M&P, Sig 229 and then at a local match find out that they have .40 ammo for their gun with a .357 Sig barrel on it, and vice versa. Major problem there...
Randy

growr said:

Seems like a solution to a non problem. But, you get to spent a lot more money when you can find it.
Randy

Click to expand...

You can say that about any defensive auto cartridge that's not a 9mm. Some of us just like to be different. If we were all practical, the only rounds we'd need are .22 LR, 9mm, .38, .357, .223, .30-06, .30-30, and .338 Mag.

One advantage I saw: during the Dark Ages (you know, about 2 years ago when ammo shelves were bare) 2 boxes of .357 continually sat on the Wally World shelf. They had more in back. There isn't a high demand for it, so in a pinch it would be a nice option to fall back on.

As mentioned by The Sarge, the .357 Sig is extremely accurate and flat-shooting...I've made 250 yard hits with a G33 with minimal "hold-over". I prefer the .357 Sig cartridge over the .40 S&W by a large margin.

I do admit that .357 Sig is usually more expensive than .40, but that's why I like having both barrels...practice a lot with .40, finish up with a couple mags of .357 Sig, and then carry the .357 Sig for CCW. Works very much like .38 Spl/.357 Mag.

Tim

I shot 800 rounds out of my 229 sport today and it was fun. The 357sig has a big bark at the range and it was definately the big dog on the line today. It was accurate, easy to shoot and easier to reload. The only problem was fatigue. 800 rounds of full power SIG is work to shoot.

I did it becasue I wanted to get my 229 sport past 10,000 rounds. I have now fired 10,050 rounds out of it over the past decade. Great gun, easy round to load and come to think of it, this gun has never seen a factory round ever.

turbo38gn said:

IMHO...... NONE, ZERO, ZILCH... I have limited experience with the rounds, purchased a 357sig, ported barrel for my M&P40.... could find nothing of value after shooting 100 rounds other than a big flame show at the end of my slide.. Loud bang, hard to control muzzle flip, a pain in the butt to load the magazine, ammo was more expensive and harder to find.

Click to expand...

I agree. At one time I was on a .357 Sig craze. I had a Beretta 96 with a .357 Sig barrel, a Sig 229, a Glock 32, and a Glock 35 with a .357 Sig ported barrel. I don't have any of them now.
The .357 is very loud and has, IMO, excessive muzzle blast. While is does shoot flat, I don't have the need for a handgun that shoots out to 200 yards; anything beyond 100 yards is rifle/carbine range for me.

In addition to the reliable feeding the others have mentioned, the 357SIG round is extremely accurate, flat shooting, and holds its velocity/accuracy with distance. It really shines in barrier penetration.

Click to expand...

That covers most of it to me. I bought a long slide Glock 35 in .40 S&W. I put a few hundred rounds through it. Then I had Jarvis fit one of his custom .357 SIG barrels to it. I keep the .40 S&W barrel in the bag "just in case" but I use the .357 SIG barrel _at least_ 10-1 over the .40 S&W. Some of that is just "nice to be different" since it seems like 90% of the LEO's in the world carry the .40.

My normal CCW is a .44 Special revolver. (S&W M296 Airweight) But I have a bug out bag with the Glock 35 and the two barrels in it. Whole bunch of Glock 31 mags loaded up with the Speer Gold Dot load (the one the Air Marshal's use). I still haven't shot a deer with that cartridge but everything else I've used it on was very impressed. I've got my .44 snub for up close and personal. If I'm going somewhere far away or at night, I throw the bag with the Glock in the vehicle. Then I can engage targets much further out there. And I've got a whole lot more repeat shots.

I don't discount that higher degree of penetration at all. If the good guy in the Tyler, TX shooting had had my Glock in .357 SIG, his bullets would have gone through the bad guy's ballistic vests. The bad guy would be dead instead of the good guy. Same thing for somebody trying to use a vehicle for cover. I live in a very, very sparsely populated rural area. If you get in trouble out on a dirt road somewhere, you are on your own. If the bad guys are blocking you in with pickups, you just might need some real penetration. Or a longer effective range than a typical CCW gun.

I do reload .357 SIG. I should try those Dillon dies but they are expensive. Right now I'm using a combination of .357 SIG and .40 S&W dies. That way I can size the base using the .40 S&W dies (carbide) and not need to lube that part. Just need a little bit of lube on the necks for the .357 SIG die. The whole process does end up being multiple steps so it does take a lot more time than 9mm or .45 ACP. But I really enjoy the round so I'm not going to complain about that.

Somebody already mentioned how the .357 SIG has been quite effective in real life shootings. More than you would expect if you just look at the lab results. My experience has been the same. I used to shoot a lot of medium size vermin with a .357 Magnum revolver with 125 grain JHP's and it was deadly. Guess I shouldn't be surprised that .357 SIG and Gold Dots gives me the same basic results.

Agree the round has a heck of a muzzle blast. Standing off to the side at 90 degrees to the muzzle will hammer you even when you are wearing muffs. You can feel the physical push on your ear drum. I was shooting with a buddy who was switching back and forth between 9mm and .357 SIG. I was wearing high quality ear plugs and was off to his left. I could tell immediately which cartridge was being fired just from the "rap" of the blast wave from the SIG. It would be overwhelming in a tight and enclosed area. If you fired one in a closed up car, you might end up with blood coming out of your ears! I keep wondering what it will be like if one of those Air Marshals has to fire a few rounds inside a plane....

Oh, and I paid the big bucks to have a custom DI AR-15 made up to shoot .357 SIG. Using a LW lower and using my Glock mags. Heck of a fun little firearm. I had it made up by Ron Williams as a pistol so that I could turn it into a SBR. Just haven't gotten around to the paperwork yet. If I was an LEO and could carry a .357 SIG, I would want that little rifle to be in my trunk.

Gregg

Been a .40 advocate since the early 90's when our department issued the Glock 22. I LOVE it! But the first time I fired a .357Sig I said I have got to get me one of these. It is a nice option to have both. I will not give up either one. But if I could only choose one, it would have to be the .40 because of availibility of ammo in my local. I suggest getting the extra, barrel it is cheaper than an extra gun...and you will enjoy it

I doubt if whatever is on the receiving end of either is gonna notice the difference..

357 sig

Began my career back in the early 70's when we carried 38 spl's & 357 magnums....retired in 08....was an officer/instructor/SWAT operator/armorer during that career....was in on the ground floor after 9-11 when several large federal agencies adopted the Sig 229 in 357 sig.
I have a lot of experience with the rd in both the Sig and Glock platforms. The round was designed from the ground up to emulate the 125 gr 357 magnum round in a compact pistol round. This it does admirably.
The traits that you attribute to it; muzzle blast, recoil , etc. were all factors in training officers to shoot it, particularly those who had never fired a handgun previously. We had the same issues with 357 magnum revolvers when issuing and training with them in the 70's and 80's.
The 357 sig is a great cartridge and has proven itself very well in the L.E. arena....as far as reloading...I have reloaded thousands of 357 sig's and never encountered any problems any different than non bottle necked rounds.
I have several Sig's and Glock's that I have replaced the 40 S&W barrels with the 357 sig barrels.....I was always a 357 magnum fan and still am and now I have high cap auto pistols that will deliver the same ballistic performance with 125 gr. bullets....doesn't get any better in my book.