Can anyone provide me with a simple comparison between the two?

TL/DR: If you're using .357 SIG, you're not WRONG...but the market is moving away from it.

Based off of what I've read on here...

.357 Magnum you can get heavy and fast enough to provide more oomph than 9mm. .357 SIG was originally designed to duplicate that in a semi-auto, by bottlenecking a .40SW down to 9mm. However, isn't as fast or heavy, and driving it that fast gets outside the expansion envelope of JHPs designed for the caliber. .357 SIG has a reputation for inherent accuracy and reliability. From my time carrying a 229 chambered in the cartridge, it's loud and snappy. You sure feel like you're carrying something fierce.

The market seems to have decided that marrying .40SW and 9mm really just gave you all the drawbacks of both cartridges for some extra FPS at the muzzle. One longtime forum member noted that major ammunition manufacturers are moving to minimal production on the cartridge, as law enforcement agencies have moved away from it due to the advances in projectile construction and the resulting terminal ballistics benefits to the less expensive, lower-recoil, higher-capacity 9x19mm cartridge have made .357 SIG and .40S&W less relevant in law enforcement and defensive circles.

Personally I think it's a cool little cartridge and I really wish a major manufacturer loaded it HOT with a hollowpoint designed to take advantage of the speed...but I seem to be in the minority.

Click on "muzzle energy chart" for each

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357sig.html

Paul Harrel and Hickok45 have done that comparison. Lucky Gunner also has information beyond the ballistics charts.

I have a .357 barrel for my .40 and have enjoyed shooting it. Unfortunately it is very expensive and a bitch to reload. On the plus side with 9mm prices soaring so much and .357 being kinda ignored maybe it can make a comeback.

quote:

Originally posted by T.Webb:
Can anyone provide me with a simple comparison between the two?

Rob Decker pretty much nailed it.

What is the purpose of the question? If you're looking for something in an auto-loader to get you to .357 Mag performance you'll want to be looking at 10mm Auto.

357 Sig is not as flexible or capable as 357 Magnum. There are so many ways to load the 357 Magnum round, from Cowboy Action up to smokin' hot hunting rounds. The Sig round can only cover a small portion of that spectrum, partially because you must make a semi-auto cycle reliably. However, as previously stated, 357.Sig is available in a variety of semi-auto pistols. This, it is a good compromise.

I have two pistols chambered in 357 Sig (P239 & P226). Both guns can also run 9mm and have the option for 40 S&W.

The P239 was my EDC before moving to Texas. I still carry the gun often and is my constant companion around the farm/ranch. With 125 gr GoldDots, it is effective against 2 & 4 leg threats I expect to encounter in my day to day activities. The P239 is IMHO better than either a snubby or 2" and on par with a 3" revolver.

My P226 is my nightstand/SHTF pistol, as well as a capable hunter when using appropriate ammo. I would compare this to a 3"-5" revolver.

Georgia-Arms is my go-to for practice ammo.

Speer Gold Dots are my first choice in Self-defense ammo, but I would also rely on Federal HST and Winchester Ranger T.

Underwood Ammo loads to the full capability of the round and has several excellent offerings in both self-defense & hunting loads.

DoubleTap did have several loads including a 180 gr hatdcast that is a pretty capable hunting round. (Note: My P239 will not reliably run 180 gr hardcast, a problem I believe would be solved with a heavier recoil spring.)

Buffalo Bore had several offerings also, but I have no experience with their product. In fact, I do not know the availability any more.

Again, to get the top level of 357 Mag performance, you will have to step up to 10mm which nearly takes you to 41 Magnum levels, but the Sig boutique offerings get you most of the way to 357 Mag. For my use, I see the jump from 357 Sig to 460 Rowland, skipping the 10mm.

With the reduction in government agency support for the 357 Sig, I would not recommend the round for a range toy. Cheap (30-32¢/round) is likely gone forever, as is the availability through ammo shortages. I was running and buying 1000 rounds/month during the 2016 shortage without concern or price increase. Supplies have dried up early in 2020.

If you want a range toy that is a little hotter and more available than 9mm, I would suggest 38 Super.

I was issued a P229 in 357 Sig for twelve years. I've carried a 357 magnum or 44 magnum in the woods for longer than twelve years. The 357 Sig is comparable to the 357 Mag in self defense situations when using 125 grain JHP. The 357 mag is a revolver cartridge which is much more versatile, if you carry a revolver.

I think everything above is true. Especially the fact that 357 Sig is not being sought after like all the other pistol cartridges.
Forty years ago I purchased a Colt 38 Super in case something like this happened. Ten years ago I purchased a P229 in .357 Sig.
Places ran out of 38 Super like everything else.
But, the 357 Sig is still available. And I am seeing 38 Super again. It just cost more now.
I buy the Underwood 38 Super. Which they are out of right now. I am also bying the Underwood 357 Sig. Which they still have available.
It is good to have one or two handguns in off the main road calibers for times like this.
John!

quote:

Originally posted by gwmac:
Paul Harrel and Hickok45 have done that comparison. Lucky Gunner also has information beyond the ballistics charts.

Paul Harrel is my favorite and he's done several videos comparing the 357Sig over the years. His comparison between the 357Sig and the .45ACP is also an eye opener. I sold my 220 in 45 soon afterward and simply added more 357Sig to the inventory.

I bought into 357Sig soon after it came out and love it. The key has always been to scrounge for great ammo at great prices and once you find it, buy it quickly. My 229 and 239 can also use 40S&W but I could care less about the 40. Though 40S&W is certainly next in line from the 357Sig as being ignored and passed over. Over the years, no matter what's happened with ammo availability, 40 has (nearly) always been plentiful and priced right.

I'd actually prefer getting a .22lr conversion kit for my 229 than add the 40S&W to my lineup. As far as I know, the .22lr conversion kit was never offered for the 239.

quote:

Originally posted by SCfromNY:
I have a .357 barrel for my .40 and have enjoyed shooting it. Unfortunately it is very expensive and a bitch to reload. On the plus side with 9mm prices soaring so much and .357 being kinda ignored maybe it can make a comeback.

Have you actually tried reloading the round, or is it others who say it's a bitch to reload? Reason I'm asking is because I've reloaded about 1,000 them with very good success. My experience has been to reload them just like any other pistol cartridge with only 1 extra step. I'm just curious as to why you think they're hard to reload.

I carry the .357 Sig, in a G32. I have another couple dozen types of pistols in .357 Sig. It's a capable cartridge that is useful on the same frames that support 9mm ad .40, and frequently pistols that shoot .357 Sig have conversion barrels available that allow 9mm and or .30 be shot from the same pistol.

It's not cost effective, other than reloading, to train with .357 Sig, unless your'e a government agency, or you reload, and even then, brass is in a smaller supply, and is more expensive, and not good for as many reloads. It's more cost effective to carry the .357 Sig, and train with a .40 barrel, or 9mm; shoot more of that. .40 is not far removed from the same recoil and feel, and is easier to reload.

.357 Sig is not .357 Magnum. When considering defensive cartridges, .357 Sig isn't nearly as bulky, doesn't have as much recoil, eliminates needing to carry speed loaders, shoots flat, and does what it was designed to do, if required; penetrate barriers. Like any handgun ammunition, it's weak in the big scheme of things, but carries half-again the energy of typical 9mm, if that matters.

.357 Sig is a best of all worlds compromise, and like many cartridges, is a compromise on several levels. It's going to be the same capacity as the same pistol and magazine size in .40. It's going to shoot flat, carry more punch, and have the same, or less recoil. It tends to be inherently more reliable when it comes to feeding. It comes at the expensive of bullet set back; there is less bearing area in the small bottle neck of the .357 Sig than .40 or .9mm, and less case neck tension or area to apply it; repeatedly chambering the same round (even twice) can result in significant setback. It's already a high pressure round, and given that setback can increase case pressure substantially, is something that must be considered.

I spoke with an air marshall instructor who said that they played hell with steel and their target systems; more wear, more damage; considerably more than other duty cartridges.

What really counts with a cartridge is that you can put the round where you want it put, period. Shot placement. If someone is carrying .357 magnum, it's generally because they like it, because they believe they can still put the rounds where they want it, and desire to take advantage of the additional power and ballistics. Same for the .357 Sig, at the expense of...expense.

For carry ammunition, .357 Sig from sig (Sig V-crown) is not that expensive, on part with most other carry ammunition, shows good results, is very controllable, repeatable, and perfectly acceptable.

I've taken advantage of some great deals on pistols such as the P229 and P226 Legion...they didn't sell as well in .357 Sig as they might have in 9mm, and consequently, I got a great deal. I can still run them in .40, no problem (and have run them in 9mm, too. Some pistols, like Glocks, will run all day on conversion barrels, so I've been able to burn up 9mm ammunition in the G32's or G33's, or .40, or .357 Sig. My P239's are happy with any of them, adding a lot of flexibility and reducing costs.

If you have a .357 Sig, you aren't necessarily tied to the cost and availability of .357 sig ammunition at the range. What you have, are options.

I guess the real deal is the gun and ammo industry is pretty much led by what Law Enforcement feels is the best at the moment.... and that seems to change every couple of years.

I stepped up to 357sig last year.... years ago I stopped shooting 357 magnum ... just did not like it in 125gr.... too much recoil not fun for me.


Once this latest ammo shortage stops I think places like Georgia Arms will start selling factory reloads in 357 Sig in bulk once again...

But because I can.... I have the same pistols in both 357sig and 9mm and so I can practice with 9mm most of the time and then carry practically the same gun chambered in 357 sig.

Thanks all. I have a P229 DAK in .357 Sig, and a .40 barrel. I was thinking of buying a P320 in .45 and someone told me my LGS has a P320 in .357 Sig available at a discounted price. But I think I'm=ll just stick with the .45 caliber.

I always liked the concept of the .357 Sig round. To my thinking, it's a 9MM on steroids.

quote:

To my thinking, it's a 9MM on steroids.

That's about as good of a way as there is in considering the caliber. Plenty of velocity for penetration, with a little bit less of the snappish recoil of its cousin, 40S&W. Both were spawned from 10mm, with the intent of providing more controllability than their parent cartridge in a gun that's sized like one chambered in 9mm instead of one designed for 45AUTO like 10mm pistols generally are. Turns out that's a somewhat important aspect when factoring and determining what is going to be an appropriate hi-cap service weapon.

From an adoption standpoint, obviously history showed that 357SIG never took off like 40S&W did. 40S&W had about a four-year head start, not an insignificant advantage. I'd also guess that the customary 'bigger is better' mentality probably had a little something to do with its relative stagnation in the marketplace as well, with 40S&W essentially being a shortened and down-powered big, bad 10mm. 357SIG today is certainly a fair bit more expensive to manufacture due in part to the necked-down nature of its case, though if it had seen greater acceptance at its inception there naturally would've been economies of scale that in turn would significantly lowered the operational cost of 357SIG relative to 40S&W.

From a comparison standpoint to that other 357, well in my mind there isn't anything of tangible significance to compare. For starters, there was never was any intent for such a comparison to be anything of relevance, considering that their initial missions were so vastly different from one another. After all they were created 60 years apart for vastly different handgun designs. 357MAG of course resides firmly in the domain of revolvers; the Coonan 357MAG and Desert Eagle are far too niche to effectively claim otherwise. 357MAG is a relative giant compared to 357SIG, both in physical size and overall performance envelope. The sheer length of 357MAG is a huge drawback for adoption into a semi-auto pistol design, whereas 357SIG plays far more nicely with integration into a 9mm-sized platform. Then there's the recoil; vastly different experiences and realities for a gun designer to deal with.

Both are certainly fun to shoot, and both have their relative strengths and weaknesses. And there is some amount of crossover when it comes to being put into use for the same roles, such as their use as a woods sidearm for protection against certain types of animals, both four and two-legged varieties. But in the end they aren't what I or most anyone else would consider a natural 'either/or'/'yin/yang'/'Abbott/Costello'/whatever to one another, certainly not in the same manner 357SIG and 40S&W are tied to a common hip in their relation to 10mm.

The thing I like about 357 SIG right now is that I can buy ammunition for it.

You are right... I went to Georgia Arms web site last week and most pistol ammo is not available but 357 Sig was.... they did have two choices both Spear and I really could not figure out the difference.. other than the price.

The fun part is when someone buys 357 Sig and meant to get 357 Magnum. The store wouldn't allow them to return it, so I bought all of it from him for 75% what he paid.

Also happens with .38 Super