I've never really been sure what .357SIG does (from a defensive perspective) that can't be done with .40S&W. Nothing wrong with the .357, of course, but I can't really see why it was invented when the .40 was already there to provide more power in 9mm-cycle guns.

But if you like it, hey, have at it!

from what I understand the .357 sig has been adopted by many State Highway Patrol units for its penetration capabilities, shots will go straight through an angled windshield without too much deveation from where you intended to shoot, also obviously shooting through doors and such, but thats about all I know about it...

So can you buy say and XD-40 and then just buya .357Sig barrel and now have a 40 adn 357 Xd using the same gun and magazines, but just swapping the barrel? Is it that easy and safe? If so does it matter if you buy teh XD-40 or the XD-357Sig and then buy the other barrel? Can you go either way?

Not exactly sure about the XD's, but as for my 226 they generally only come in .40, buy the .357 sig barrel and your good to go. The .357 sig uses the same casing as the .40 it's just tapered to take the .357 bullet. Chamber pressure is higher with the .357, but (from what my smith has told me, and he is a Sig man) the spring and headspace all stays the same...just slap in your new barrel, load the .357 into your regular .40 mags and shoot to your hearts content...

Anoyne else know more about this round???

Yeah, I carry a G32C most of the time in 357 Sig. There is this thought that bottlenecked cartridges feed better, and I have to say that I've had a couple .40's jam, whereas I've never had my 357 sig jam. It could be true, dunno, but I rely on mine.

Also, there are the ubiquitus FOOTPOUNDS to consider. Not to get into this as I think round development has more to do with effectivness than footpounds, but the 357sig does generate more ftlbs than the 40.

(all hollowpoints are pretty much the same anyways)

Anyways, the 357 does in my experience have a bit more snappy recoil than the 40's I've shot, but it's manageable. It's a fun round but it's alot more expensive to feed, something else to consider.

Hope that helps.

Zhur

i have both the 40cal and 357sig barrels for my sig 229 & 226. this is what i have found over the last few years. the 357sig shoots straighter and flatter, hits harder, and penetrates deeper. it does cost more for ammo from most local stores though, there are some that don't even carry this round. the recoil between the 40 and the 357 are different in that the 40 tends to flip the muzzle more while the 357 pushes harder straight back. i have heard that the 357 feeds more reliably than the 40 but i haven't had a single problem with either (sigs). the only downsides i have found with the 357sig is the cost and availibility of local ammo. because of that alone, i wouldn't want just the 357 barrel. i buy my ammo online, so i mostly do use the 357 barrel.

@dutchman

I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one who's heard that the 357 feeds more reliably. I was, to be honest, unsure of the validity of that statement, but it sounds logical. Trying to put a smaller diameter pill in a larger hole and all.

I've never really noticed the flip vs push notion of the two, but that may be that I've never shot the two on the same platform. I've shot XD's, Beretta's, Kahrs, and Sigs in 40, and only Glocks in 357Sig. I wonder if it has more to do with the grip angle and bore height? Interesting none the less. If anyone else has any info, it'd be much appreciated.

zhur

I've owned both calibers in Glock models. I have a friend that is a ballistic nut/genius! He doesn't have a college education, for that matter he doesn't have a high school education, but I trust his knowledge and experience where ballistics are concerned. He's got both in the Glock as well.
I asked him his opinion on the two rounds. His response........."The .40 will kill a man no doubt, that new .357 round will do the same job, it just does it more violently."
And yes, .357 Sig is an expensive animal!

Originally Posted by big dutchman

i have both the 40cal and 357sig barrels for my sig 229 & 226. this is what i have found over the last few years. the 357sig shoots straighter and flatter, hits harder, and penetrates deeper. it does cost more for ammo from most local stores though, there are some that don't even carry this round. the recoil between the 40 and the 357 are different in that the 40 tends to flip the muzzle more while the 357 pushes harder straight back. i have heard that the 357 feeds more reliably than the 40 but i haven't had a single problem with either (sigs). the only downsides i have found with the 357sig is the cost and availibility of local ammo. because of that alone, i wouldn't want just the 357 barrel. i buy my ammo online, so i mostly do use the 357 barrel.

You're right! The .357sig clearly has a much flatter trajectory and does have more power. I can also tell you look in a sig casing after it's fired and look how clean the powder burns compared to about anything else. I too get my ammo on line 1000 rounds at a time. .357 sig is more expensive to shoot but for it's muzzle energy and velocity the few dollars difference to the .40 isn't a big deal. When you fire a .357sig (I have both M&P full and compacts) there is an unmistakable bark and crispness you don't get from anything else other than maybe a 10mm. Just my opinion.

What's you guys' consensus on recoil management for follow-up shots? Will the crisper recoil make dtaps more difficult?

I can put good doubles in a paper plate at 7 yards just as fast as I can with a 9mm. I must say though that I have a G32C, as in compensated. That may be why. I've not shot a 357Sig that isn't compensated so I have no frame of reference, but any pistol can be handled with proper grip/stance/practice, it just might take longer. I do think it took me a bit longer to "tame" the 357Sig than it did any other pistol I own.

Zhur

I had the privilege of shooting a Sig P229 today at the range. After four mags, I began shooting one-handed, as I usually do with my Sig P220 Compact. The only thing I can compare the .357Sig to vs. a 40 S&W was a Kahr 40. I didn't feel comfortable shooting the Kahr one-handed. But I only put two mags through it and that isn't fair to Kahr. The Sig was loaded with Speer Gold Dot hollow points. Man, what a nice shooting pistol. But then again, it was a Sig. 8 12-round mags of pure pleasure and tight groups. I was picking the corner stuff on the target cuz the center was all shot up; I do the same with my P220 Compact. BTW: the P229 was an old pre-tac rail Sig. It had rust on the decocker and slide release and some of the black was worn off the slide but man, did that sucker shoot nice.