re: What are the boards thoughts on the .357 Sig? Is it superior to the .40 Cal?

quote:

---

357 Sig is loaded to higher pressures than the 40 S&W.

---

OK, but wouldn't the lighter bullet negate the higher pressures?

quote:

---

It's designed to replicate a 125gr 357mag out of a 4" revolver which is widely regarded as the best handgun man stopper ever. It replicates it very well. The .357mag runs away with heavier bullets and longer barrels, but for that particular application the sig duplicates it well. It spits them at close to 1400fps, which is what a full house mag gets you.

---

Aware of that, I just don't know that I believe that the .357 sig has more recoil than a .40.

Both are shitty

quote:

---

Aware of that, I just don't know that I believe that the .357 sig has more recoil than a .40.

---

I was weaned on .45 ACP (yeah, I'm old, wanna fight about it?) and I am apparently just not as recoil sensitive as others. I don't find the .40 all that snappy compared to 9mm.

It may just be the muzzle velocity (or, heck, psychological factors), but .357 Sig seems a little snappier than .40 S&W out of the same platform (and I have very limited experience with the round - maybe 100 rounds.)

That's compared to multiple thousands of 9mm, .357 magnum/.38 SPL and .45 ACP over the years and several hundred .40 S&W and .380 ACP. I don't have significant experience with other handgun rounds (including 10mm).

quote:

---

Their older brother

---

By this, I guess you mean the cartridge that was designed over 100 years ago, when powders did not exist that can give the efficiency and performance of today’s powders. I have an older brother that is also fatter and slower than me. I'd rather be faster and able to punch harder when we fight though.

quote:

---

Aware of that, I just don't know that I believe that the .357 sig has more recoil than a .40.

---

Maybe someone has done some scientific test of it. We all know that F = M*V. So a 125 grain projectile pushing 1,400 FPS, compared to a lighter weight .40 cal projectile going slower, you might see a difference in Force, which might mean a difference in recoil, as every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

I carry 180 grain bullets in my XD-40. I have a .357 Sig conversion barrel for it and have shot the 125 grain rounds. Going back and forth between the two on the range, I don't see much of a difference in recoil. I think a lot of it depends on the shooter. I'm a relatively short guy at 5'7" and 185 lbs. But I have pretty large hands for someone my size. I shoot full-size pistols just fine. If anything, it may help your aim as the .357 Sig is supposedly a flatter trajectory as well. I tried all different weights in the .40 and found that I am most accurate with the 180 gr bullets and I like the heavier weight over the lighter ones.

And you would be wrong.

quote:

---

The 10mm was designed purely with self defenense in mind.

---

No, no it wasn't.

quote:

---

The FBI only requested the inferior 40 S&W when they realized the 10mm was too much to handle for some agents.

---

The FBI did no such thing. S&W found that the downloaded (FBI-spec) 10mm Auto could be duplicated in a shorter OAL cartridge loaded to higher pressure. This meant a cartridge that met the FBI's criteria AND could fit in smaller framed guns which meant far less tooling time towards production. The recoil myth is as much baloney as it was for those citing it for the DoD change from the 1911 and .45ACP.

Please enlighten me on what the 10mm was originally designed for. Maybe the recoil was a myth and maybe it wasn't, but no one can argue that the 40 did not start off as a full power 10mm.