quote:

Originally posted by Cousin Vinnie:
I was wondering if anyone has choreographed their P239 ...

I tried, but found it can't dance

quote:

Originally posted by 7mm Mauser:
With Glocks you really need to purchase their 357 Sig mags for reliable functioning.

7mm

Never had a problem with my Gen 3 G22 running a G31 barrel.

Glock and use of dedicated 357SIG marked mags (different follower): more of a Gen4 problem if the problem shows up at all.

I've got a 357SIG barrel for my 40S&W P229, and similar for my G23s. Big Smiley Face each time I take them out for a little flame-on time.

quote:

Originally posted by Cousin Vinnie:
I have a P239 SAS in 357 Sig and just love it. I was wondering if anyone has choreographed their P239 in 357 Sig? I always wondered how much velocity is lost with the shorter 3.6" barrel compared to longer barrels.

I have chronographed many hundreds of rounds of 357SIG out of various firearms over the decades. With the P239 and P229 all readings are the average of several different firearms, most of the others I only have one example of each model. All recorded velocities were averages of 8 or more rounds

Federal 125 grain JHP
P239 - 1341 FPS
USPc - 1331 FPS
P229 - 1350 FPS

Federal 150 grain JHP
P239 - 1077 FPS
USPc - 1088 FPS
P229 - 1093 FPS

Winchester Ranger 125 grain SXT
P239 - 1321 FPS
X-5 - 1392 FPS

Speer 100 grain Frangibile
P239 - 1368 FPS
X-5 - 1441 FPS
M&P - 1491 FPS
MP5 - 1642 FPS

SIG 125 grain V-Crown
P239 - 1335 FPS
M&P - 1385 FPS

Corbon 125 grain JHP
P239 - 1270 FPS
M&P - 1387 FPS

Thank you colt_saa!
Looks like my concerns of substantial reduced performance from the shorter P239 is unfounded. This new information has given me renewed confidence to load up my P239 and put it into CCW service.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by 7mm Mauser:
With Glocks you really need to purchase their 357 Sig mags for reliable functioning.

Did they change something, then? Because two of the six mags I have for my G22 are labelled for 357 Sig and they appear to be identical in all respects to the four labelled for 40 S&W.

I have Glock mags marked for 40 S&W and 357. The followers appear to be different. I have had them for about 6 years.

quote:

Originally posted by 1lowlife:

quote:

Originally posted by 7mm Mauser:
With Glocks you really need to purchase their 357 Sig mags for reliable functioning.

7mm

Never had a problem with my Gen 3 G22 running a G31 barrel.

I did have a problem about 6 years ago running a mix of factory and reloads (I own and use a micrometer.) Getting 357 mags fixed my problem. Perhaps later mags are interchangeable.

Current 357 follower #4 looks exactly like 40 follower #10 for Glock. Or maybe 3 and 9. I can't remember. I will look at my followers whenever I get home.

quote:

I was wondering if anyone has choreographed their P239 in 357 Sig

Like this?




Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUe_Pi8NfT4

After a horrible steel match with the P220 I fired the P239 357 Sig with Gold Dots. No recoil. No abnormal noise. No failure to load. Seems like a nice round.

I do need to improve on many aspects of pistolcraft. Learned a lot from people at the match.

Get some Underwood ammo for carry.

I discovered one thing that makes shooting a 40 S&W more enjoyable than the 357 Sig. Free ammo. I discovered that I have a friend who has sufficient 40 S&W to offer training ammo to me. Sunday I plan to put the 40 S&W barrel back in. Depending on how it goes, I may stick with that caliber.

The .357 Sig round has always fascinated me a bit. I shoot my P239 SAS in .40 S&W better than my G22, so I'm thinking a P229 in .357 Sig might be even better. I've been looking for an acceptable (*) P229 in .357 Sig for carry for a bit better than a month. Given the way everybody seemed to be headed toward 9mm like lemmings, I really expected finding one to be fairly easy. So far it hasn't been.

(*) Where "acceptable" is defined as "condition I want for what I have to spend."