357 Sig performance

[fed_wif_a_sig]

The round was selected because the USSS chose it. Over time the "word" was that this round did not overpenetrate. Penetrating the aircraft skin isnt a problem, its the cartridge splitting up and sending several smaller projectiles out of the skin and into the mass's behind. When I was on the streets, that wasnt a problem (as in the Miami incident) but if it had stayed on the plane? Imigian where those three projo's whould have ended up? Somewhere 50 to 80 feel back? That worries me. Like I said earlier, I dont know the answer but it just is something to discuss.

Steve

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Tom357]

Wasn't there talk about the Air Marshalls using a frangible round on board aircraft? I wonder what happened to that idea?

The round was selected because the USSS chose it. Over time the "word" was that this round did not overpenetrate. Penetrating the aircraft skin isnt a problem, its the cartridge splitting up and sending several smaller projectiles out of the skin and into the mass's behind. When I was on the streets, that wasnt a problem (as in the Miami incident) but if it had stayed on the plane? Imigian where those three projo's whould have ended up? Somewhere 50 to 80 feel back? That worries me. Like I said earlier, I dont know the answer but it just is something to discuss.

Steve

[fed_wif_a_sig]

Sorry Tom. The duty issue is 125gr Gold Dots.

Steve

[DonGlock26]

I think having a round that will probably go though an airline passenger seat or bulkhead is a plus. That's what a terrorist would use for cover. Even whole bullets going throught the jet's skin isn't a problem. Mythbusters busted that myth wide open.

I noticed that none of the rounds hit his upper chest or head. Perhaps, they were trying to avoid the backpack that was supposed to be a bomb. They are very well trained and knew what they were doing. IMHO

[rocky]

No kidding, I though Air Marshals would use frangable rounds , so passengers behind the intended target would not be hit.

[RSSZ]

To me,any bullet flying along at ?fps that strikes a target,either human or other material,has so many variables. Think about it. A few fps. Bullet makeup. Bullet shape. Bullet diameter. Depth of HP. Thickness of jacket. Etc.,etc.,etc.

Then you move into the variables of target. They're too many to even mention. I figure that you could hit a human target just a little bit different and get a whole different outcome.

People ask me,"what's the best caliber and bullet for CCW"?? What the heck do you tell them. Do you start spewing forth facts and figures off of some graph or chart. I say no.

We each have our own opinions on what works best. None of us feel that a .22LR or a .25ACP is the very best round for CC. But some of us here do believe that the 38Spec,357Mag,9mm,40S&W,.45ACP,.357Sig,10mm,44Spec .,and a host of others are their best.

Who am I to tell someone that they're crazy for believeing in any one of the above. I say, do your homework,practice with your weapon of choice,if your pick is marginal(or otherwise) put more than one round on target(as I do). It's fairly easy to put the foot lbs. of a .44Mag on the BG when you carry one of the above. Do the math.

I try to stay away from the "best" caliber,or bullet discussions. I figure to each their own. Training,practice,mindset,multiple hits on target will make up for not carring or shooting the absolute "best". --------

[Freedz]

I totally agree with you in saying there is no "best" when it comes to picking a self defense caliber, but for the most part when people want to get into shooting I usually point them in the direction of the 9mm for a first pistol if they ask me my opinion. I say that since it has been proven effective for self defense, the fact that you can get 9mm in almost any handgun platform you could want, fairly mild recoil, and that ammo is dirt cheap and there are almost endless choices of defense ammo - I'd say that for a beginner a 9mm is probably the "best". Im not saying this is true for everyone but id say that the 9 is probably one of the most well rounded and versatile cartridges out there.

[srfl]

I personally like the 357 SIG and carry one occasionally in the form of a SIG SP2340 sigpro. My carry round is Winchester's Ranger T 125gr 357 SIG (RA357SIGT).

But I don't think I lose by going to a 9mm +P or +P+, .40 S&W or .45 ACP which are all excellent defense rounds as long as the round has a well designed bullet and I do my part and make effective hits on my target.

[1man]

I personally like the 357 SIG and carry one occasionally in the form of a SIG SP2340 sigpro. My carry round is Winchester's Ranger T 125gr 357 SIG (RA357SIGT).

I need to hurry up grab a couple more boxes of that to test in my HKc.

[Redneck Repairs]

while i have nothing against the .357 sig i just dont see why folks are so excited of the re invention of the .38 super . Furthermore i dont feel it offers anything to ME not allready handled by 9mm.

[Tom357]

...Furthermore i dont feel it offers anything to ME not allready handled by 9mm.

If you don't think it offers you anything, then you shouldn't use it. I was attracted by the idea of getting better than, or equal to 9mm +P+ performance in a SAAMI spec standard load in a pistol designed to eat that all day everyday without excessive wear. I also liked the idea of .357Mag performance in a semi-auto combined with modern bullet design improvements. I think the argument, here, was whether the concerns expressed in the original post were unique to the 357SIG, and I maintain that the overpenetration and fragmentation under those circumstances and in that environment were not unique to the 357SIG.

[johns961]

while i have nothing against the .357 sig i just dont see why folks are so excited of the re invention of the .38 super . Furthermore i dont feel it offers anything to ME not allready handled by 9mm.

I have a 38 super and like it very much. I also have a sig 2340 357 and I like it very much. I know many places in town I can get new 357 sig ammunition.
I only know one place I can get 38 super. And that is hit and miss.
I usally get it mail order.

Both good rounds. 38 super would be better if they loaded like the old days.
Corbon seems to be the only one doing that.

John!

[Shizzlemah]

One of the big benefits of the .357SIG is that it is a bottleneck cartridge.

Ever have a gun that was finicky about feeding ? Now thing about putting a .35" round into a .41" chamber. Miles to spare, ultra reliable chambering. I have never had a FTF with this round (nor an FTE, in my sig239).

I agree entirely that if you feel good with a 9mm or whatever, then carry it. Dont' carry something you are not comfortable shooting or toting around 24/7 (or 16/7 for you slackers!)

I like the 357 sig. It is a little zippy, but hey that's life. I'm on the more gentle side of the muzzle. Maybe ask the BG what you should carry

[Colin]

I would like a Sig 229 in 357sig if I could carry, but would likely carry a G26 most of the time.

[OD*]

Air marshals: Bullets pack too much punch

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...3248-2105r.htm