serpentine
Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 22
Isn’t .357Sig in the constitution?
M&P357Sig; FDE; 2.0 and general puzzlement
- Thread starter Harkrader
- Start date
OP
Harkrader
Member
I came back to re-read the posts and all I can say is "WOW!"
A few parting shots:
When a Sig P229/357Sig was first pressed into my hands I shot the qualifying course as well as I did with the Sig P228/9mm. The only way I had to determine trajectory was to shoot at increasingly distant targets with each gun and note point of impact. The 357 far outperformed the 9mm.
Ammo we trained with, 9mm, was at least +P and, by my imperfect memory, more like +P+. I most remember that after shooting it, American ammo seemed like puff loads. 357Sig really tromped those.
I used and continue to use 357 guns in competition where nearly everyone else uses 9mm. To be sure, age has slowed my hand and "re-aimed" my eyes. Still, there is little difference between my performance with an M&P/357 and my M&P Performance Center 5" 9mm.
.40S&W. I can think of no good reason for it, but of the 9mm, .45ACP, .40S&W and 357Sig, I shoot the .40 the worst of all. Kind of annoying because I reload .45ACP and 9mm, and used to load .40S&W, but I gave up reloading 357Sig because I messed up too many shells. I buy custom commercial reloads and watch for sales.
Until this week I had been shooting my M&P357 better than my Sig P320C. Then, upon carefully reading a lot about the Wilson Combat grip frames for the Sig P320, I bought one. I set up a 5-target stage requiring shooting 50-degrees right and left from ~5 yards, then ~10 yards, and ~15. My goal was two rounds in a 2"X2.5" oval in the "head" of each target. Ten rounds per stage. I fired a P320 with the Sig frame and a P320 with the WC and was astounded to see I was 1.5 seconds faster and with comparable accuracy with the WC . The difference, clearly, was in how quickly I could fire the second shot.
So, for me the caliber is alive and well. I've had excellent service from Storm Lake barrels and if I needed to convert a newer S&W to 357Sig, that is what I would use. Thing is, I now have three M&P/357Sig (two LEO turn-ins), and two Sig P320c/357Sig. I bought a Sig caliber conversion kit in 357 and stuffed it in the safe, for someday.
I appreciate all the input to this thread. I enjoyed it and learned something. SDH
A few parting shots:
When a Sig P229/357Sig was first pressed into my hands I shot the qualifying course as well as I did with the Sig P228/9mm. The only way I had to determine trajectory was to shoot at increasingly distant targets with each gun and note point of impact. The 357 far outperformed the 9mm.
Ammo we trained with, 9mm, was at least +P and, by my imperfect memory, more like +P+. I most remember that after shooting it, American ammo seemed like puff loads. 357Sig really tromped those.
I used and continue to use 357 guns in competition where nearly everyone else uses 9mm. To be sure, age has slowed my hand and "re-aimed" my eyes. Still, there is little difference between my performance with an M&P/357 and my M&P Performance Center 5" 9mm.
.40S&W. I can think of no good reason for it, but of the 9mm, .45ACP, .40S&W and 357Sig, I shoot the .40 the worst of all. Kind of annoying because I reload .45ACP and 9mm, and used to load .40S&W, but I gave up reloading 357Sig because I messed up too many shells. I buy custom commercial reloads and watch for sales.
Until this week I had been shooting my M&P357 better than my Sig P320C. Then, upon carefully reading a lot about the Wilson Combat grip frames for the Sig P320, I bought one. I set up a 5-target stage requiring shooting 50-degrees right and left from ~5 yards, then ~10 yards, and ~15. My goal was two rounds in a 2"X2.5" oval in the "head" of each target. Ten rounds per stage. I fired a P320 with the Sig frame and a P320 with the WC and was astounded to see I was 1.5 seconds faster and with comparable accuracy with the WC . The difference, clearly, was in how quickly I could fire the second shot.
So, for me the caliber is alive and well. I've had excellent service from Storm Lake barrels and if I needed to convert a newer S&W to 357Sig, that is what I would use. Thing is, I now have three M&P/357Sig (two LEO turn-ins), and two Sig P320c/357Sig. I bought a Sig caliber conversion kit in 357 and stuffed it in the safe, for someday.
I appreciate all the input to this thread. I enjoyed it and learned something. SDH
One thing I like about 357 Sig and 40 S&W currently is that I can readily find both.
I do not carry 9mm but have checked for it at many online dealers and nadda/noway/ain't to be found.
I will keep my 357 Sigs and 40s and 45 acp and am glad I have an almost lifetime supply of 357 magnum and 38 special.
I do not carry 9mm but have checked for it at many online dealers and nadda/noway/ain't to be found.
I will keep my 357 Sigs and 40s and 45 acp and am glad I have an almost lifetime supply of 357 magnum and 38 special.
Doug M.
Member
I am sure that it is not hard to convert a 2.0 .40 to a .357Sig, and as far as I know, there are models of the M&P 2.0 that have 4.25" barrels. If I were advising a new shooter on pistol purchase, I would advocate for the M&P; I have found them to be better fitting and softer shooting. It would also have a red dot sight. I have been in Glocks for too long and have too much gear and trigger time to switch as a practical and fiscal matter.
It was interesting to hear that NCHP ended up having problems with their .357 M&Ps; I was in a class in 2008 with a couple of their instructors and they raved about the platform. It would not surprise me if the performance differences seen reflect that the agencies that went .357Sig in any platform were simply more serious about training and as a result got better hits. Chuck Haggard reported on 9mm shootings from his old agency and regardless of platform they had great results ... because they trained hard. Placement is likely to be the single biggest variable if one uses anything from .38 Special SWC on up.
ETA: A member on another forum worked for an agency that issued Glocks in .357 Sig for a relatively short time. They had the same problems with them that have consistently plagued the .40s (and I don't think they weapon mounted lights, which REALLY messed up the .40s). They traded for 9mm, and never looked back. Training was much cheaper, and scores went up.
Despite my history with Glocks, if I were going to have a .40 to use, it would be an M&P. Not even a close call. (Note for the record: I have a Glock 33 and carry it a lot. It has a few hundred rounds downrange for testing, and has never bobbled - but it is not at all fun to shoot. I am also pretty big and still relatively strong. I would not want to inflict in on someone smaller or with real hand problems.)
It was interesting to hear that NCHP ended up having problems with their .357 M&Ps; I was in a class in 2008 with a couple of their instructors and they raved about the platform. It would not surprise me if the performance differences seen reflect that the agencies that went .357Sig in any platform were simply more serious about training and as a result got better hits. Chuck Haggard reported on 9mm shootings from his old agency and regardless of platform they had great results ... because they trained hard. Placement is likely to be the single biggest variable if one uses anything from .38 Special SWC on up.
ETA: A member on another forum worked for an agency that issued Glocks in .357 Sig for a relatively short time. They had the same problems with them that have consistently plagued the .40s (and I don't think they weapon mounted lights, which REALLY messed up the .40s). They traded for 9mm, and never looked back. Training was much cheaper, and scores went up.
Despite my history with Glocks, if I were going to have a .40 to use, it would be an M&P. Not even a close call. (Note for the record: I have a Glock 33 and carry it a lot. It has a few hundred rounds downrange for testing, and has never bobbled - but it is not at all fun to shoot. I am also pretty big and still relatively strong. I would not want to inflict in on someone smaller or with real hand problems.)
Last edited:
I have a FNS 40 and a FNX 40. I have 9mm and 357 Sig barrels for each as well as the 9mm magazines.
I have many thousands of rounds through each gun. Probably evenly mixed of 40 and 357 Sig with 9mm getting a small amount of attention.
I have never had a failure or burp or hickup of a problem with either caliber in either gun.
I carry 357 Sig in the FNX 40 almost daily.
I also have a glock 27 with 357 Sig and 9mm. I have thousands of rounds through it but will NOT carry the gun as I can not get through 50 rounds without a failure to eject. The most consistent non problem is with 9mm and I do not carry 9mm. The gun used to have more problems but some of the work I have done on it has helped it. The big problem is that it shoots very accurately and I want it to be problem free.
After several years I might have to send it back to glock to see what they find. Never another glock as my FNH weapons and M&P weapons have been flawless through thousands of rounds each.
Lately I have been looking at the M&P 40 2.0 full size. and if I get it I will get a 357 Sig barrel for it......or a FNS 40 Compact as another "last" gun.
I have many thousands of rounds through each gun. Probably evenly mixed of 40 and 357 Sig with 9mm getting a small amount of attention.
I have never had a failure or burp or hickup of a problem with either caliber in either gun.
I carry 357 Sig in the FNX 40 almost daily.
I also have a glock 27 with 357 Sig and 9mm. I have thousands of rounds through it but will NOT carry the gun as I can not get through 50 rounds without a failure to eject. The most consistent non problem is with 9mm and I do not carry 9mm. The gun used to have more problems but some of the work I have done on it has helped it. The big problem is that it shoots very accurately and I want it to be problem free.
After several years I might have to send it back to glock to see what they find. Never another glock as my FNH weapons and M&P weapons have been flawless through thousands of rounds each.
Lately I have been looking at the M&P 40 2.0 full size. and if I get it I will get a 357 Sig barrel for it......or a FNS 40 Compact as another "last" gun.
uncleted327
Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 508
- Reaction score
- 791
357 Sig is an excellent caliber and is as far from death as 40 is. The real question is do all the 9mm fanboys who always comment stupid BS about 357 and 40 having no advantage over the 9 in any category really believe what they are spewing? Are they trying to convince us or themselves? Give me a 357, Sig or Mag, or a 40 over a 9mm anyday, in any gun.
I have a 1.0 M&P 40 compact (same size as the 2.0 subcompact) converted to .357 SIG with nearly 3,000 rounds of .357 SIG through it. It is not ported, and handles the .357 SIG round just as well as my SIG P320 compact or my SIG P229. (Can you tell I'm a .357 SIG fanboy?) My converted 40c is my EDC, and I have yet to find a pistol that I like better for that role. My advice is to not shy away from a 1.0 compact or a 2.0 subcompact in .357 SIG. I think you'll find that you'll be able to shoot it just fine.
Here's a link to another post of mine where I summarize my experiences with my 40c and my two Shields:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/140717276-post1.html
