Why isn�t this one more popular? Everybody and their brother chambers their semi-autos for the 9, .40 and .45. Off the top of my head I only know of a couple of companies who chamber the .357 Sig, Glock and obviously Sig-Sauer, but I�m sure there are others.

Looking at the ballistics it looks like an almost perfect defensive chambering. A 125 grain bullet close to or over 1400 fps duplicates the performance of the .357 Mag., and I�ve heard no one dis that for its wound channel or stopping capabilities. With only 125 grains of bullet weight recoil isn�t going to be too harsh, AFAIK. Seems like a natural for any of the compacts or smaller semi-autos that chamber the .40.

So, what are the flies in the ointment here? Too loud? Not so conveniently reloadable since it�s a bottleneck case? Supposedly that bottleneck improves its feeding reliability.

Anyway, I have no experience with this round so only know what I�ve read, but I was thinking about this last night and wondering why it hasn�t been more widely chambered in a variety of the more popular semi-autos.

If God wanted man to shoot bottleneck pistol cartridges He would have had John Browning design one.

I wonder if it isn't a matter of the KISS gene kicking in when we look at any bottleneck handgun cartridge. Sure doesn't seem like anything but traditional straight wall cartridges ever get far in handguns regardless of the perceived "advantages."

Whenever I look at those .357 Sig cartridges I see handloading problems pass across my vision unsummoned.

I would suspect that due to the intensity of the cartridge it is hard on the guns. Does anyone know if the service life/rounds fired for the 357 Sig is shorter/lower than for other pistol rounds???

Pistol cartridges tend to find their popularity wedded to some particular application, i.e. hunting, competition or defensive use. Since the .357 SIG really doesn�t perform demonstrably better in any of those areas than the old standbys, it just hasn�t attracted a big following. If the SIG round had been developed before the .40 S&W, I suspect things might be different.

I think bottle-neck pistol cartridges got a bad rap back in the day when they were chambered in revolvers (think .22 Jet in S&W Mod 53�s) but I�ve heard of no reliability issues with the round when chambered in quality designs like SIG-Sauer and Glock. The bottle-neck pistol round was used a hundred years ago in Europe, but that paradigm was pretty foreign to American shooters.

While the SIG round operates at higher pressure than any other medium bore handgun cartridge, I've not personally heard of any wear and tear issues.

The selection, availability and price of duty and practice ammo for the .357 SIG hasn�t helped anything either.

I wondered about the pressure, but it's based on the .40 S&W which is a high pressure to start with. From what I've read that bottleneck design really lets the round funnel into the chamber well.

The price issue I can certainly understand, but wonder if that is a chicken or egg issue? Ammo costs a lot because they don't sell a lot. If they sold as much .357 Sig as they do 9mm wouldn't the cost be significantly cheaper? And if it was cheaper wouldn't they sell more?

Just speculating, again, I have no experience at all with this round, just wondering what others knew or opined.

Maybe it was an answer to a question that was never asked.

I've shot a couple of them and the biggest turn off I had was with the muzzle flash. There was a LOT...

It's possible that could have been that brand of ammo though...

I just thought that if I had to pull the trigger in a dark room I wouldn't be able to see well enough to get off my second shot. I'd be shooting blind...

That, and the already mentioned ammo price...

HAJ,

I've "seen" ( ) no problems with low-light shooting over the past five (fsix? damn my memory is slipping) years since we adopted the .357 Sig.

Reliability with the P229DAK is, as would be expected of Sig products, 100% so far.

Personally, I miss my .45 but am content to carry the Sig.

George

One of my good IDPA friends is a devotee of the 357 SIG. He has several pistols set up for this caliber (1911-style and Glock, for the most part, although I think he has a SIG too) and now competes with them exclusively. He reloads his ammo and tells me he has no more problems with this caliber than any other.

I had a 357 SIG barrel & magazines for my Glock 23 a few years back, but eventually sold the 357 SIG stuff as I didn't use it much at all. I found little discernible difference in shooting the 357 SIG vs the 40 S&W. Recoil impulse is about the same, POA/POI wasn't much different, accuracy was good with both. But ammo is pricier for the 357, so I just stuck with the 40 (at the time I was mostly shooting duty/issued ammo in 40).

Heya George!

Thanks for your experience and insight man! Like I said, I thought that it was possible that the particular ammo I used was the culprit. I wish I could remember what it was so that I could offer up that bit of warning on this thread.

I'm real glad to hear that it's been a success for your guys. It gives me hope as I really love the ballistics on that bad boy!

Well the Texas Dept of Public Safety, including the Texas Rangers, has been using the 357 SIG since the 1990's. it's all good for them.

When the time comes that we replace our current weapons (a long time from now) or I retire (maybe about the same time frame ) I'll buy mine without a second thought. I like the .357 Sig enough that I asked about their new run of .357 1911s after the "cold weather" carbine course I attended there a few weeks back. Had they been a "stocked" item, I would have walked away with one.

When the department orders ammo, a few of us order cases for ourselves as well. We don't get the Agency price, but it's enough of a difference to make it worthwhile. I have enough of my own to shoot for some time outside of "sanctioned" training where ammo is provided.

George

I love the 357 Sig and it is one of my favorite carry rounds

Hey 175-you missed a gun. The three guys on the left all have guns.

I'm thinking it's because most people who want more than a 9mm, want larger dia and heavier bullets, not more speed.

The original point of the .357 Sig was to match the .357 magnum's ballistics. In the press of the day, the .357 Mag with 125 gr bullets at 1400+ fps was considered the "ultimate stopper" in handgun ammo. The .357 Sig was designed to match that performance, but still fit into a 9mm framed semi-auto.

In factory ammo, they seem to work well, and feed reliably.

Handloaded, I'd urge caution. Because the base of the bullet is hanging in space inside the case, setback in feeding may be more likely. I've never loaded for the .357 Sig, but I did work with its big brother, the .400 Cor-Bon, and you had to be damn careful with it to avoid the problem.

I guess the .357 Sig might be a more reliable feeder, than say the .40, but good .40's run reliably, and there's just not that much difference in real performance, according to the most recent data. If you're using a 1911, you can get the same performance out of the .38 Super, or the 9x23, and have another round in the mag.

If you've got a 10mm 1911, then a barrel change alone will let you shoot the .357 Sig, which is sorta neat.

Shot out of a 229 platform, I believe it to be one of the better Law Enforcement duty weapons going today. Been using the .357 Sig through a couple platforms since its inception. We've been through testing, transition and issue of .38s, .357, 9mm, 10mm, 40 and 45 cals prior to settling on the 357 Sig. In law enforcement, the standard duty 357 magnum has developed a stellar track record on the street. The 357 Sig does an outstanding job at near duplication of the 357 magnum duty revolver performance in a compact great handling semi-auto. So far, the Sig round has been equally stellar on the street in that capacity and is much loved by the law.

Best

I honestly believe this is it. I was told that the New Mexico State Police were having trouble with their Glock 31's chambered for the Sig cartridge. Seems the frames were cracking across the holes for the locking block pins.

I looked over a Smith & Wesson M&P yesterday that was chambered for .357 Sig. I was bringing home another purchase, or I'd have put it in layaway. 16 rounds of evil like that will keep the boarders at bay.

I have never had a problem hand loading and getting reliable ammo , but I don't just slam dunk cases either, I size where as they a head spaced off the shoulder and lip together as close as possible with caution to hit the shoulder slightly first if not at the same time . good firm tapper crimp than have fun

I for one,don't see speed as being more,if I need more gun I go bigger,same with my rifles...
I have a .38,the next step up for me is a .44 special.I have a 30/06,my next rifle is .338...
If I had a .357 Sig,I would be looking for a conversion kit.My LGS keeps maybe 10 boxes of Sig on the shelf,vs. 40 or 50 cases of .40,plus a 100K of 9mm in the back

DING, DIng, Ding we have a winner

When stacking law enforcement duty rounds for comparison using FBI Wound Ballistic Test Protocol, the .357 Sig performs well, not only in Bare Gelatin testing, but also in barrier testing through Heavy Clothing, Steel, Wallboard, Plywood, Safety Glass, and IWBA Heavy Clothing. The .357 Sig outperforms both 9mm +P+ 115 loads and +P 124 loads in all the above FBI barrier catagories except for Steel, and the Sig equals or outperforms the 40 S&W in all FBI barrier catagories. For civilian self-defense use, barrier penetration in addition to terminal performance on human targets may not be of the same concern as with law enforcement use. But for this demand and need in law enforcement issued duty weapons and ammunition, the .357 Sig scores very high marks in comparision testing. It's difficult to find any flies in the ointment within the context of law enforcement use.

Best

for me its like this, you get one or 2 rounds less in the magazine, and the ammo is alot more expensive than 9mm. The other is as time has past the 357 sig seems to be loaded to less and less pressure and isn't as much of a difference over 9mm as it was originally conceived. I think its a very interesting little round, but for me I have moved all my semi autos to 9mm, they all take the same ammo and it cuts down on having odd ball stuff floating around that only gets shot in one gun. with all the other stuff I shoot, 22lr, 17hmr 9mm, and all the other centerfire rifles I shoot of various calibers I don't want or need another type of ammo to keep up with. although I may break from that as the new 17wsm looks really cool.

A lot of very good reasons here.....I do not like the bottle neck cartridge, the lack of available ammo, price of ammo, ect just to name a few