Printable View
I am considering buying a .357 Sig barrel for my Sig 229 40 caliber handgun.
I have talked to a few LEO friends and they are divided as far as with
good shot placrment which caliber would incapacitate the fastest.
The .357 Sig would be for self-defense and the 40 caliber would be used for target practice.
(1) Does anyone have info on the .357 Sig street perforance?
(2) What caliber do you like?
Niether trumps the other. Place them both properly, they will both do the job.
As has been stated many times...there is no magic bullet/caliber.
Being hit with either will roll your socks down...which can you shoot better?
Otherwise...:popcorn::deadhorse::popcorn::deadhors e::popcorn::deadhorse::popcorn:
Really?
I don't have any skin in this game (I have a couple of .40s and no .357 Sig), but I'll offer the observation that .357 Sig ammo is scarcer, more expensive, and comes in fewer loadings (bullet weight & configuration) than .40 S&W. Those are practical considerations that would tip my needle toward the .40.
The answer is yes.
Unless you are open carrying, then no unless you have a badge and sash, then it's Tuesday.
I like them both and have both barrels for my P229. Shot placement is the key and they are both effective rounds.
.40S&W ammo is easier to find and comes in a greater variety of weights etc.
I don't believe there is a practical advantage of one over the other. It's generally not a good idea to practice with one round and carry another. They handle differently although in my experience they both hit the same POI without having to change the sights.
IMO forgo the new barrel and buy more ammo.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by gasmitty
I think anyone who tells you there is one over the other which will provide faster incapacitation is blowing smoke up your skirt.
There are too many variables within the human body to come to any definite conclusion.
They are both relatively effective on about the same level as far as I'm concerned.
So it really comes down to practicalities. Which one do you shoot better, faster and with the most accuracy? That's the bottom line really... Shot placement and follow-up shots is usually the determining factor.
The availability of ammo with a larger variety of bullet weight and configuration is also one of the factors which goes on the practicality side.
I have a P229 in 40 and a 357 sig barrel. I also have the same setup with a S&W M&Pc.
The 357 sig round has a flatter trajectory, is better at penetrating barriers like a car door, and is a little easier on the recoil. That being said... I feel comfortable carrying either caliber.
if your gun is sighted from the factory for the 40 than the bbl swap will change the POI with the 357 sig round.
it will be lower, for my p239/40 the 357 is 6" lower at 21 feet. WMMV
the 125gr SIG has the same V as a 125gr S&W Magnum; from the same bbl length.
change the weight or bbl length and it is no longer true.
40 has more going for it ( by not much) and is my choice between the two.
either with well places shot
Incapacitation is not achieved by caliber.
The one that hits an area that causes the most damage/blood loss will give the quickest incapacitation. This goes for all the major service pistol calibers. You have a good pistol, assuming you have the mags and holsters needed to support it, spend money on improving your skills instead of buying stuff.
I have a .357 Sig barrel in my Glock 23, and our Sheriff's Department was testing a 30 year old armored vest for penetration. They asked me to fire one round into the vest, and practically every major caliber was represented that day. The .357 Sig out-penetrated all other rounds except for a standard velocity .22 LR. Go figure! As stated before, placement is everything, and I am equally comfortable with either round in my Glock.