quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Mass x V squared is the energy formula. The .357 has 40% more energy than the 9mm. So for stopping power it will be much more effective.

Nobody's arguing the 357 SIG doesn't have more muzzle and terminal energy than even a 9mm +P. Again: The argument is that handgun rounds have so little that the increase doesn't amount to an appreciable difference when it comes to effectiveness.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:

quote:

Originally posted by Wolfpacker:

Were the 10MM, 40 cal., 357 Sig, .380, etc., already maxed out for capabilities? Didn’t the improvements in bullet technology also improve those as well?

No, those other calibers weren't maxed out and have benefited from bullet improvements as well.

In the case of .40, .45, 10mm, the benefit isn't as pronounced as those already had a bigger starting diameter and more energy to drive expansion and penetration. Now the penetration and expansion is much more consistent and reliable through different media, but it was always decent and a failure to expand is still a .40-.45 caliber hole.

.380 benefited more than 9mm. Used to be you had to pick between adequate penetration OR expansion. Now there are loads that can give you both...just barely, but they do get it done.

Exactly. Especially good observation on the 380.

quote:

Originally posted by dsiets:
. Don't expect to be enamored w/ the P239 factory grips....You might want to start looking around now.

Yes, I carry a P239 in 9mm right now and I changed out the factory grips to crimson trace ones with a side laser right away...

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Mass x V squared is the energy formula. The .357 has 40% more energy than the 9mm. So for stopping power it will be much more effective.

Nobody's arguing the 357 SIG doesn't have more muzzle and terminal energy than even a 9mm +P. Again: The argument is that handgun rounds have so little that the increase doesn't amount to an appreciable difference when it comes to effectiveness.

If we were talking about the effectiveness of stabbing someone in the chest with a knife or an ice pick...would doing so with 300 ft/lbs of force vs. 500 ft lbs of force make a whit of difference? (assuming either would more than overcome the penetration threshold)

Handguns "stab" people with bullets. All that matters is depth and size of the hole, that's it. If more ft/lbs means a deeper hole or more expansion, then the higher ft/lb round was more "effective." If not, then it didn't matter. Bullets are designed to penetrate and expand in a certain velocity envelope which is how you can get very similar performance out of differing energy levels.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
9mm Speer +P Gold Dot has 364 ft. lbs, and in .357 is has 506 ft. lbs. of energy. Both rounds use 124 grain bullets, but the 9mm is travelling 1150 fps, and the .357 is going 1350.

Mass x V squared is the energy formula. The .357 has 40% more energy than the 9mm. So for stopping power it will be much more effective.

Underwood and DoubleTap have a 125 grain loading pushing 1475f/ps and 604 ft/lbs, more in tune to what the round is capable of and fun to shoot as well.

I enjoy the round. I carry it in a Gen 4 Glock 32 with Underwood bonded ammo.

I have a Glock 35, Glock 32, Glock 33, P226 and P229 all in 357 sig.

I reload 9mm already and use the same bullets in the 357 sig.

For practical self defense purposes the 357 SIG doesn't do anything better than a 9mm +P. There have been studies that show there is an insignificant difference in wounding capabilities in all the major calibers.