If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 380***
See my post below yours. Lucky Gunner did not take into account modern bullet designs that take advantage of the extra velocity.
It's like anything ammo-related. Opinions vary, test data aren't real world results, and everyone's got an opinion. I never understood the point personally, but with the ammo situation, it might be wise to add one to the collection. 357Sig has been more available than 9 or 40 for months. It's still expensive, and firearms that take it are too.See my post below yours. Lucky Gunner did not take into account modern bullet designs that take advantage of the extra velocity.
The lucky gunner article is a good description of why it never took off as spicy 9mm. But it misses why it could become great.
357 SIG hollow points tend to have excellent deep penetration but suffer from thel lowest reliability and consistency numbers. Sometimes the deep penetration is causedy the fails. The small size and extremely high velocity of this hollow point caused the most fail to functions in the test. This was exasperated by barriers. 357 SIG hollow points recorded an average of a 35% degradation due to barriers. The higher velocity caused more cases of accidental fragmentation as evidenced in both Phase3 and Phase 5 barrier data. Permanent wound cavity size of the best 357 SIG hollowpoints was bigger than the 9mm and a little smaller than the .40. Our resultsa are also recorded and verified in the other 6 tests mentioned earlier.
It’s not ignoring the other test data. It’s showing the capability of the monolithic fluid transfer bullets with the high velocity 357 Sig. you’re right that I forgot to highlight the 9mm LeHigh/underwood xtreme defender loads. Those are much closer. But I don’t like shooting +P+ all the time. Especially with Underwood who load their cartridges on the high side already.It's like anything ammo-related. Opinions vary, test data aren't real world results, and everyone's got an opinion. I never understood the point personally, but with the ammo situation, it might be wise to add one to the collection. 357Sig has been more available than 9 or 40 for months. It's still expensive, and firearms that take it are too.
The highlighted lines ignore all the other test data that show some 9mm rounds outperforming some 357Sig. Hell, even comparing Underwood to Underwood, the results are much closer. I'll stick with 9mm, but that's just my opinion.
357 sig was created to mimic the "manstopper" 125 grain 357 magnum round. 125 grain at 1500 fpsMy first handgun was a Gen 3 G31. Shooting .357 SIG is fun. But, .357 SIG is underappreciated for one simple reason: it isn't 9x19.
The longer explanation is basically a combination of economies of scale, path dependency, and the fact that the differences between 9x19, .40S&W, .45ACP, and .357 SIG are marginal.
Economies of scale is basically the idea that if there's a large infrastructure making a large amount of a product, that product is cheaper to make. This is why, in normal markets, not today, cartridges like 9x19, 5.56x45, 12-gauge, 7.62x51, and 7.62x39 are cheap to shoot. Those cartridges have a high amount of demand from the militaries of the world, police forces, and private consumers - and the big factor in economies of scale is military and police sales. What this means in the context of 9x19 versus .357 SIG is that 9x19 is almost always going to be cheaper to shoot over .357 SIG, and I'm willing to bet that its possible to handload 9x19 cheaper than .357 SIG because of 9x19 being cheaper brass and probably less powder being used. Economies of scale work in favor of 9x19 to keep it cheap to shoot, both for the guy who shoots one box a year and a police force or military who orders millions of rounds (think NYPD, US military).
Path dependency is essentially the idea of being used to something and wanting to stick with it. Historical example: the US Army wanting to adopt the M14 because of the idea of being able to use the same machines that were used for M1 production and also similar manual of arms except for the detachable mag. This can also be tied with the desire to keep adoption costs low. Think about it this way: if someone or an organization is already invested in 9x19 or .40S&W or .45ACP, why would they switch to a marginally similar caliber? Its a largely unnecessary investment for a marginal increase in performance.
The final reason is the marginal performance. 9x19 gets around 350 to 450 ft. lbs. of energy. The .357 SIG gets around 500 to 600 ft. lbs. of energy. A difference of between 50 and 250 ft. lbs. of energy clearly hasn't been enough to motivate militaries and police to adopt .357 SIG; the private consumer market generally follows the military and police market because of economies of scale and also the bias of "well, if its good enough for the Army, its good enough for me."
I'll also add the extra point that 9x19 is quieter and sound impacts the perception of recoil. Subsonic 9x19 is easier to get through factory or handloaded ammo. Subsonic .357 SIG is a thing, but by no means common.
357 sig was created to mimic the "manstopper" 125 grain 357 magnum round. 125 grain at 1500 fps
Which one company is able to do in 357 sig and several get around 1450
However they released the cartridge around the same time the 40 got hot when everyone was thinking bigger is better so that's a Strike against it...poor timing not that 40 is any better or worse
Then you are trying to take away wheel guns from fudds.... also a strike against it
Then underwood has 115 grains 9mm at 1410
And 124 at 1350
It's a neat round that'll get more popular as a wildcat
Instead of a hug, it needs LeHigh and Underwood to make more fluid transfer cartridges:
Underwood Ammo offers the most comprehensive and innovative Lehigh Defense™ Supersonic Lead Free Handgun Ammo for personal defense & hunting. Shop now .357 Sig Copper ammo with Solid Monolithic.www.underwoodammo.com
Before, it was really just spicy 9mm. But with these modern bullets, the extra velocity gets you much better permanent cavitation. Check out the numbers vs 9mm below.
The only thing that beats it all around is the 10mm 115gr, but even that may penetrate a little too much for self defense use:
View attachment 438935
View attachment 438936
Better for what?I think the point is you have to find the absolute hottest 9mm to start reaching standard .357sig. loads. I shoot and enjoy them both and most often carry the 9 but there really is no comparison .357 sig is the better round if you can handle it.
Fair. I forgot to highlight the 9mm monolithics. But the non-(+) 9mm Xtreme defender has half the volume of permanent cavitation compared to the 357 Sig.Good data. But why isn't the 9mm Underwood XD +P+ 90gr the comparison, as that's the closest 9mm to the Underwood sig375, and the 9mm's numbers aren't that far off? Granted, it's +P+, but if we're talking the highest figures on the chart, then you'd have to consider that round for the best "apples to apples", and there, the difference is negligible.
Hydrostatic shock isn’t actually a thing in tissue damage.Better for what?
All you're doing with defensive handgun rounds is punching holes. Even the .357sig doesn't come close to the velocities needed to create meaningful temporary cavities or cause hydrostatic shock. I realize that people love trying to quantify performance by measuring velocity, energy, etc but it's all largely meaningless with handguns. Bullet design is a lot more important imho.
I don't see the point if .357sig at all. I don't see the point of .40s&w or .380acp either, to be honest. Just stick with 9mm or .45acp for defensive semi-autos, maybe 10mm for a woods gun. $0.02