Will Sig Sauer be endurance tested anytime soon?

[gvsmovcd]

Be nice to see how a SIG P226 or P229 compares to HK, S&W, and Glock with the Endurance Test.

[GJM]

I did 9,000 rounds thru a new 2012 226R between Jan and April without a stoppage, malfunction or issue.

[gvsmovcd]

I did 9,000 rounds thru a new 2012 226R between Jan and April without a stoppage, malfunction or issue.

Yeah, I've heard good things about SIG reliability. But then again I've heard good things about Glock and it didn't hold up as well as I thought it would in the Endurance Test. Be nice to see how SIG comes out at 50K rounds.

[PPGMD]

Todd has said in the past that he believe that Sigs would easily make it through the 50,000 round endurance test.

Anyways Sig is horrible at marketing themselves outside the traditional shooting press. So I wouldn't bet on it happening ever unless Todd wants to spend his own coin on it.

[gvsmovcd]

Todd has said in the past that he believe that Sigs would easily make it through the 50,000 round endurance test.

Anyways Sig is horrible at marketing themselves outside the traditional shooting press. So I wouldn't bet on it happening ever unless Todd wants to spend his own coin on it.

What qualifies as making it thru 50K? I was surprised to see how well the HK45c did but then see all the stoppages in the P30. I thought the P30 would perform similarly to the HK45c because of the similarity of design. Arent' the two models almost identical except for caliber and the external grip?

[Le Français]

What qualifies as making it thru 50K? I was surprised to see how well the HK45c did but then see all the stoppages in the P30. I thought the P30 would perform similarly to the HK45c because of the similarity of design. Arent' the two models almost identical except for caliber and the external grip?

Todd's .45 test was of an HK45 full size, not HK45c.

[BigT]

What qualifies as making it thru 50K? I was surprised to see how well the HK45c did but then see all the stoppages in the P30. I thought the P30 would perform similarly to the HK45c because of the similarity of design. Arent' the two models almost identical except for caliber and the external grip?


Im not Todd nor do I play him on the errornet. That said as I understand it the majority of stoppages the P30 experienced where as a result of either the out of spec spring , which is likely a small sample or batch, and then a couple more at the end of the test after the frame damage had occured. Which was at a very high real world as opposed to interweb round count.

[ToddG]

Be nice to see how a SIG P226 or P229 compares to HK, S&W, and Glock with the Endurance Test.

I agree! Someone should tell SIG to call me about that. :cool:

[Sparks2112]

I agree! Someone should tell SIG to call me about that. :cool:

Hell, if all it'll take is two pistols that'd be easy to figure out. :)

[ToddG]

Hell, if all it'll take is two pistols that'd be easy to figure out. :)

And 50,000 rounds of ammunition... that's always the tricky part. :cool:

[GJM]

Leaving aside how much the cost of ammo for 50,000 rounds dwarfs the cost of the pistol, since the plural of anecdote is not data, I am not sure what we are supposed to conclude from the test of just ONE pistol.

My sense is that reading topics from places like PF will give you a pretty good idea of what is happening with a platform. For example, for a while, almost every thread was about Glock reliability and M&P accuracy -- that could have been considered a clue. Never saw much complaining about M&P reliability or Glock accuracy. Never read much about issues with accuracy or reliability with a Sig 226 or P30.

More than trying to divine something about reliability from the test of one pistol, I find it interesting to watch a shooter come up the learning curve with a platform, working thru holsters, sights, mods and most importantly -- the software side of running a particular platform.

[JAD]

I find it interesting to watch a shooter other than myself come up the learning curve with a platform...

Fixed it for you. And, I agree.


Jon
KC

[NickA]

More than trying to divine something about reliability from the test of one pistol, I find it interesting to watch a shooter come up the learning curve with a platform, working thru holsters, sights, mods and most importantly -- the software side of running a particular platform.

Agreed. And since Todd has gone completely to one end of the spectrum with the 1911, it would be interesting to see him go back to where he started, with a DA/SA pistol.

[JAD]

Agreed. And since Todd has gone completely to one end of the spectrum with the 1911, it would be interesting to see him go back to where he started, with a DA/SA pistol.

Or somewhere he hasn't been yet...

1518


Jon
KC

[banzaijohn]

Be nice to see how a SIG P226 or P229 compares to HK, S&W, and Glock with the Endurance Test.

This may not correlate to the present and I never intended it as an endurance test, but back in the early 1990's, before I was married and had kids, (meaning I had time and money), I had an early West German P226 with a Serial No. in the U 1682XX range. On my Department, we had a "Top Gun" award and I wanted to de-throne the person that possessed it because he was an insufferable prick. I had a Dillion 1050 press and purchased Winchester bullets, primers, and Unique powder by the pallet - - Black Hills knew me by name (I seemed to calling them every other week). I shot approx 50,000 rounds that year, (115 grain WIN FMJ, WSP, 5.9 GR Unique) and 10k of NATO ball. That Sig ate it all without issue and helped me earn the Top Gun award. The gun was cleaned and oiled after every range session (4-500 rounds, 4-5x weekly) as it was my duty gun.

The only parts I changed were the recoil springs every 10,000 rounds and I upgraded the magazine springs to Wolff +10% when they started to feel weaker, nothing else was replaced - - and to be honest, I think it would have run fine with the stock springs, it was only done prophylactically. Although the accuracy was still acceptable, I sent it to Bar Sto for a new barrel and then to Robar for Polymax refinish with NP3 of the internals. During the refinish, Robar said the firing pin spring was broken and replaced it, but I never had any failures. After getting it back, I put another 5,000 rounds through it. At about the 57,000 mark, I started to get vertical stringing of the rounds and there was more pronounced mechanical impact to the recoil (almost like the "twang" of the buffer inside the tube of an AR), but the gun continued to function. Upon inspection, both rails had sustained cracks, the left side was almost half the length of the rail and the right side just slightly shorter. I called Sig and inquired about a replacement frame. They asked if they could inspect the gun and any documented history on it. I sent them the gun and my log book. A month later, Sig sent me a new gun, their third generation version, with the thicker rails with a Serial No. in the U357XXX range. I don't have nearly as many rounds through this one beacuse I went on to carry a P220, then G21, G17, G19, and 1911.

[LittleLebowski]

This may not correlate to the present and I never intended it as an endurance test, but back in the early 1990's, before I was married and had kids, (meaning I had time and money), I had an early West German P226 with a Serial No. in the U 1682XX range. On my Department, we had a "Top Gun" award and I wanted to de-throne the person that possessed it because he was an insufferable prick. I had a Dillion 1050 press and purchased Winchester bullets, primers, and Unique powder by the pallet - - Black Hills knew me by name (I seemed to calling them every other week). I shot approx 50,000 rounds that year, (115 grain WIN FMJ, WSP, 5.9 GR Unique) and 10k of NATO ball. That Sig ate it all without issue and helped me earn the Top Gun award. The gun was cleaned and oiled after every range session (4-500 rounds, 4-5x weekly) as it was my duty gun.

The only parts I changed were the recoil springs every 10,000 rounds and I upgraded the magazine springs to Wolff +10% when they started to feel weaker, nothing else was replaced - - and to be honest, I think it would have run fine with the stock springs, it was only done prophylactically. Although the accuracy was still acceptable, I sent it to Bar Sto for a new barrel and then to Robar for Polymax refinish with NP3 of the internals. During the refinish, Robar said the firing pin spring was broken and replaced it, but I never had any failures. After getting it back, I put another 5,000 rounds through it. At about the 57,000 mark, I started to get vertical stringing of the rounds and there was more pronounced mechanical impact to the recoil (almost like the "twang" of the buffer inside the tube of an AR), but the gun continued to function. Upon inspection, both rails had sustained cracks, the left side was almost half the length of the rail and the right side just slightly shorter. I called Sig and inquired about a replacement frame. They asked if they could inspect the gun and any documented history on it. I sent them the gun and my log book. A month later, Sig sent me a new gun, their third generation version, with the thicker rails with a Serial No. in the U357XXX range. I don't have nearly as many rounds through this one beacuse I went on to carry a P220, then G21, G17, G19, and 1911.

Excellent post, thank you for sharing.

[TCinVA]

I think the NSWG is doing a fairly good collective job of endurance testing the Sig P22x series pistols.

Of course, the snag there is that they probably never got guns from the factory that had unworkable trigger parts in them.

[jlw]

Leaving aside how much the cost of ammo for 50,000 rounds dwarfs the cost of the pistol, since the plural of anecdote is not data, I am not sure what we are supposed to conclude from the test of just ONE pistol.

My sense is that reading topics from places like PF will give you a pretty good idea of what is happening with a platform. For example, for a while, almost every thread was about Glock reliability and M&P accuracy -- that could have been considered a clue. Never saw much complaining about M&P reliability or Glock accuracy. Never read much about issues with accuracy or reliability with a Sig 226 or P30.

More than trying to divine something about reliability from the test of one pistol, I find it interesting to watch a shooter come up the learning curve with a platform, working thru holsters, sights, mods and most importantly -- the software side of running a particular platform.


Sample size could have a lot to do with the lack of threads on the P226 and P30. Glocks and M&Ps are far more prevalent.


Or somewhere he hasn't been yet...

1518


Jon
KC


There ya go.

[Sparks2112]

I think the NSWG is doing a fairly good collective job of endurance testing the Sig P22x series pistols.

Of course, the snag there is that they probably never got guns from the factory that had unworkable trigger parts in them.

I will make inquiries next opportunity I have to do so, I'm curious.

[Tamara]

There ya go.

Cylinder turns the wrong way.

[LittleLebowski]

Agreed. And since Todd has gone completely to one end of the spectrum with the 1911, it would be interesting to see him go back to where he started, with a DA/SA pistol.

Yes, a revolver :D

[NickA]

Yes, a revolver :D

J-frame endurance test? I'd follow that.

[JAD]

He's going to ban us all.


Jon
KC

[jlw]

Cylinder turns the wrong way.

Not that there is anything wrong with that...

[JAD]

Not that there is anything wrong with that...

Embrace diversity?

[Sparks2112]

I think the NSWG is doing a fairly good collective job of endurance testing the Sig P22x series pistols.

Of course, the snag there is that they probably never got guns from the factory that had unworkable trigger parts in them.

So with the newer 226R's and Mk25's the guns get delivered to Crane, where they're inspected for acceptance, then delivered to NSW. They apparently then proceed to beat the ever loving kitten out of them. Direct quote "...rarely is there a malfunction noted that is not attributable to a bad magazine, or shooter induced."

NSW is apparently pleased with their sigs.

[GJM]

So with the newer 226R's and Mk25's the guns get delivered to Crane, where they're inspected for acceptance, then delivered to NSW. They apparently then proceed to beat the ever loving kitten out of them. Direct quote "...rarely is there a malfunction noted that is not attributable to a bad magazine, or shooter induced."

NSW is apparently pleased with their sigs.

I have 4 226 pistols, an older 226, two new manufacture 226R's and one newish MK25. Haven't had a stoppage or other issue with any of them. Same goes for my 228, 225, 229 and 239 pistols, which include old and new manufacture.

[Odin Bravo One]

My first 226 ran close to 75k before cracking. Had I changed the roll pins, I speculate it could have gone on for some time beyond that. But I didn't.

For the last 5 years, I have had a brand new 226 classic, or a 226R, each and every year. This year I got a brand new Mk25. Other than magazines that were worn out, and/or I get a bad grip, I haven't had many malfunctions attributable to the gun. The only malfunctions that I really recall are those where sand/dirt had worked itself into the action.

These guns generally see about 15k rounds before I get rid of them for a new one. My current Mk25 is likely to see 3 or 4 times that before I trade it in on a newer model.

ETA: Last 226R had just over 15k through it for the year, and not one malfunction. Current Mk25 has about 4500 rounds through it, and no malfunctions. Magazines were brand new with the last 226R. No parts or spring replacements on the 226R, and none to date on the Mk25.

[Clyde from Carolina]

Man, would y'all quit talking about the SIGs ? ;)

I am trying to stay dedicated on learning my new-to-me P2000 with V2 LEM, and this thread makes me want to take my old 226 out for some lovin'. :rolleyes:

[PPGMD]

I agree! Someone should tell SIG to call me about that. :cool:

LOL, good luck with that. Sig was the only major sponsor (they were a stage sponsor which is like the 2nd or 3rd highest sponsor level) that didn't send a sponsored shooter, nor anyone else to represent them at the Bianchi Cup.

Sigs marketing department is stupid IMO, it needs to get out of the past. Every other company that sponsored the match sent shooters, and many sent executives.

[PPGMD]

Oh and for anyone shooting the snot out of a Sig, or thinking about it, I have one word for you: grease.

Using a thicker grease for range sessions will almost eliminate rail wear. And honestly you can using the same grease even off the range with concealed carry (your body keeps the gun warm).

This was my Sig P228R at 10,000 rounds:
http://www.lazyeights.net/Avion/P228R/P228R_10K_Detail_Strip/03_Sig_P228R_10k.jpg

The only major wear on the frame was from the decocking lever, and my reloads.

[ffhounddog]

I say a P229 and 50K of 40sw or .357sig should do it. Granted they would probably send some low recoil load with it to show us that they work well...

[ToddG]

I say a P229 and 50K of 40sw or .357sig should do it. Granted they would probably send some low recoil load with it to show us that they work well...

I would love to do a P229R 357 SIG test. Shot a buddy's on Friday and was reminded just how tame it is. I still believe in the magic voodoo power of 357 SIG. But there's no way I'm footing the bill for 50k of it.

[Sparks2112]

I would love to do a P229R 357 SIG test. Shot a buddy's on Friday and was reminded just how tame it is. I still believe in the magic voodoo power of 357 SIG. But there's no way I'm footing the bill for 50k of it.

What if we double dog dare you?

[ToddG]

What if we double dog dare you?

Double dog dare + 2 guns + 50,000 rounds of ammo = you win.

[Sparks2112]

Double dog dare + 2 guns + 50,000 rounds of ammo = you win.

Only if you make a challenge coin for best double dog dares, then maybe I'll try for coin #1

[JodyH]

Double dog dare + 2 guns + 50,000 rounds of ammo = you win.
double dog dare + www.kickstarter.com = ??? profit ???

:p

[John Hearne]

I know that my endurance with Sig is being tested. I helped a buddy order a new duty gun at the end of 2012 through their IOP program. I understand that the world is crazy and nobody was surprised when the pistol wasn't delivered until this week.

What did surprise us was that a duty gun was only shipped with two magazines despite the very clear and distinct product description in the IOP paperwork. My buddy called Sig's main number and was told that they didn't care what the paperwork said, he was not getting a 3rd magazine. I gave him the number our of our Federal rep. The Federal rep told him the same thing - sorry, don't care what the form says, you aren't getting a third magazine. My buddy was persistent and the rep finally agreed to take his address. The rep said he'd look around and see if he could find a used magazine to send.

I've had very mixed luck with Sig's "customer service" over the years. From horrible to great. I thought things were getting better but apparently not. If I wasn't required to carry a Sig by my employer, they would be dead to me after this escapade. My buddy has spent a lot of money, waited six months, and can't carry his new pistol because he only has one spare mag.

[DocGKR]

They are already dead to me...

[JAD]

. But there's no way I'm footing the bill for 50k of it.

http://m.dillonprecision.com/uimages/dillon_reloading_machines/1050_m.jpg

Insanely high pressure bottleneck times 50k rolls of the dice... What could go wrong?

[Savage Hands]

Fondling a Mk25 at the shop yesterday makes me want one.

[gvsmovcd]

I would love to do a P229R 357 SIG test. Shot a buddy's on Friday and was reminded just how tame it is.

This would be awesome. To this day I get sad that 357 SIG did not become more prevalent. My fav round of them all. It's only weakness IMHO is availability (a shame because this is a market thing and has nothing to do with the cartridge itself).

[JHC]

This would be awesome. To this day I get sad that 357 SIG did not become more prevalent. My fav round of them all. It's only weakness IMHO is availability (a shame because this is a market thing and has nothing to do with the cartridge itself).

Ok so just how sick accurate can they be? As in mechanical accuracy using a rest at 25 yds? That's what has long tempted me about that cartridge. I've seen several of our Gen 4 Glock 9mms print 2" or a bit better at that distance which I find pretty cool and wondered how much more precision the 226/229 .357 Sig delivered. Or does it really show itself at 100 yds?

[DocGKR]

What does .357 Sig offer over 9 mm in typical duty and CCW use--I mean besides the increased cost, decreased ammunition availability, reduced pistol service life, increased blast, decreased magazine capacity, etc...?

[JodyH]

What does .357 Sig offer over 9 mm in typical duty and CCW use. ...?
Voodoo

[John Hearne]

The 357 Sig seems to have a lot of potential. I bet it would be real good if you modded the case and used it to launch .40 caliber bullets.

[GJM]

One thing about the .357 Sig cartridge, you won't make a lot of friends on the range -- shooting next/around the cartridge is almost as bad as being next on the line to the guy with the 11 inch AR in 5.56 with a Battlecomp.

My Sig pistols were very accurate, but the G4 Glock pistols are now accurate enough I can't tell the difference in accuracy between Sig, HK and Glock anymore. I suspect ammo will play a bigger role in long range accuracy than differences in platform accuracy.

[NMBigfoot02]

The 357 Sig seems to have a lot of potential. I bet it would be real good if you modded the case and used it to launch .40 caliber bullets.

So...40S&W then?

[JHC]

What does .357 Sig offer over 9 mm in typical duty and CCW use--I mean besides the increased cost, decreased ammunition availability, reduced pistol service life, increased blast, decreased magazine capacity, etc...?

My interest has been in a long range target shooting/plinking/varmint dispatcher from a handy semiauto is all. Not enough of a need to "pull the trigger" on one though.

[JHC]

the 357 sig seems to have a lot of potential. I bet it would be real good if you modded the case and used it to launch .40 caliber bullets.

NICE!

[Byron]

So...40S&W then?

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/012/132/thatsthejoke.jpg

[gvsmovcd]

One thing about the .357 Sig cartridge, you won't make a lot of friends on the range -- shooting next/around the cartridge is almost as bad as being next on the line to the guy with the 11 inch AR in 5.56 with a Battlecomp.


Does 357 SIG shoot louder than 9mm +P? They both run at the same velocity.

Everyone I meet that runs 9mm for SD uses +P ammo. Standard velocity 9mm is not known as being good for SD. IMHO a positive of .40 and 357 SIG is that they just have standard loads. But of course I doubt people are shooting +P at the range.

[John Hearne]

IMHO a positive of .40 and 357 SIG is that they just have standard loads. But of course I doubt people are shooting +P at the range.

Actually, they're pretty much +P already - 35k psi IIRC.

[gvsmovcd]

Actually, they're pretty much +P already - 35k psi IIRC.

Whatever they are, it's what the manufacturer is expecting the gun to run.

[GJM]

Does 357 SIG shoot louder than 9mm +P? They both run at the same velocity.

Everyone I meet that runs 9mm for SD uses +P ammo. Standard velocity 9mm is not known as being good for SD. IMHO a positive of .40 and 357 SIG is that they just have standard loads. But of course I doubt people are shooting +P at the range.

I am not sure what the basis is for your statement "standard velocity 9mm is not known as being good for SD?"

Leaving aside terminal ballistics, I don't generally see people shooting +P 9mm ammo at courses. Most folks are shooting standard velocity ball ammo because it is economical, has less blast and has less splash back on steel than JHP.

As to the issue of blast:

Using 9mm Winchester Ranger as an example:

muzzle velocity:


147 grain, Bonded, 995 fps
124 +P T load, 1,180 fps
127 +P+ T load, 1,250 fps


125 357 Sig T load, 1,350 fps

[Sparks2112]

Everyone I meet that runs 9mm for SD uses +P ammo. Standard velocity 9mm is not known as being good for SD.

I must have missed that one. The 147gr Federal HST I carry performs equal or better than every other popular 9mm SD I'm aware of.

[gvsmovcd]

I am not sure what the basis is for your statement "standard velocity 9mm is not known as being good for SD?"


Basis is research examing one-shot stops of various calibers and loads. standard velocity 9mm performs more poorly than +P rated ammo on average.




As to the issue of blast:

Using 9mm Winchester Ranger as an example:

muzzle velocity:


147 grain, Bonded, 995 fps
124 +P T load, 1,180 fps
127 +P+ T load, 1,250 fps


125 357 Sig T load, 1,350 fps

Several of the LEOs I work with use 115gr Corbon +P which runs at 1350fps (same as 357 SIG).

[ToddG]

What does .357 Sig offer over 9 mm in typical duty and CCW use--I mean besides the increased cost, decreased ammunition availability, reduced pistol service life, increased blast, decreased magazine capacity, etc...?

As Jody said, there's the voodoo. But putting that aside...

Compared to the 9mm per your post, the 357 is probably the most accurate semiauto handgun cartridge I've ever used. Whether 1" at 25yd from a stock mass-produced gun is meaningfully better than 2-3" for other calibers is certainly debatable but it's an improvement nonetheless. It also shoots ridiculously flat compared to any other LE handgun caliber. At the first Vickers Tactical open enrollment class I won the walkback drill at around 140yd shooting a DAK P229 in 357... against a guy shooting a 1911 in .45 who was certainly every bit as accurate a shooter as I am. The difference is that even out to 140yd I just put the front sight on the steel target while he had to calculate and hold over. And that was with some random practice ammo, probably now-discontinued Blazer.

Compared to .40, it's far easier to control in recoil. Also, contrary to popular belief, the 357SIG doesn't have to wear guns out faster than .40 S&W... when I was at SIG we had an independent test run that showed there was less wear & tear on the gun from the 357 than the 40 for the same pistol (P229). It's simply a function of how the gun is designed. Other manufacturers want to shoehorn the 357 into their existing .40-cal pistol. SIG built the original P229 around the 357 and then "shoehorned" the .40 into it, instead. They did the same with the P226 and P239.

Compared to .45, you have higher capacity in a smaller gun. While there are some incredibly accurate gun/ammo combinations you can find in .45, it's not as consistent as the 357 in my experience.

Regarding the other issues:

Noise -- yes, it's loud. It's far worse for bystanders than the shooter. But there's no getting around the fact that it's kitten loud.

Cost -- yes, it's expensive. This is a chicken 'n egg issue to an extent (less demand means less production means higher cost), but it's also just inherently more expensive to produce a bottlenecked pistol cartridge.

Ammo availability -- again, less demand equals less production. Two big 357-carrying agencies are currently rethinking their gun/ammo selection and if either one of them drops the 357 cartridge I can see it going the way of 10mm.

I'm certainly not slavishly devoted to the 357... I haven't carried one since 2006 and that was when SIG was paying for my guns and ammo. But I think it's unfortunate it didn't become more accepted.

[JV_]

Actually, they're pretty much +P already - 35k psi IIRC.

.40 & 9mm = 35K PSI
9mm +P = 38.5K PSI
357SIG = 40K PSI

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm

[Al T.]

Basis is research examining one-shot stops of various calibers and loads.

Can you share your source for this information?

[gvsmovcd]

Other manufacturers want to shoehorn the 357 into their existing .40-cal pistol. SIG built the original P229 around the 357 and then "shoehorned" the .40 into it, instead. They did the same with the P226 and P239.


Todd, are you aware of any other pistol models (other than Sig Sauer models) that were designed around 357 SIG? or is Sig Sauer the only one since they designed the cartridge?

[gvsmovcd]

.40 & 9mm = 35K PSI
9mm +P = 38.5K PSI
357SIG = 40K PSI

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm

This likely why 9mm pistol manuals always warn against regularly running +P ammo and most I've seen say not to run +P+ at all. I know people who still run +P+ though.

But this is what I meant by my previous post. You run .40 and you're running what the manufacturer built the pistol for. When you run 9mm +P you running something that is not what the pistol was specifically designed for and why the manuals generally say not to run it regularly.

[JV_]

and most I've seen say not to run +P+ at all.I suspect they say no +P+ because there's no SAAMI spec for +P+, nor is there one for .40 +P.

[gvsmovcd]

I suspect they say no +P+ because there's no SAAMI spec for +P+, nor is there one for .40 +P.

I rarely see +P+ for 9mm anymore (I don't think it's as prevalent as it was in the past). I've never seen .40+P

[JV_]

I've never seen .40+P
http://www.underwoodammo.com/40sandwp135grainjacketedhollowpointboxof50.aspx

IIRC - CorBon used to have some too.

[Ed L]

Basis is research examing one-shot stops of various calibers and loads. standard velocity 9mm performs more poorly than +P rated ammo on average.


One-shot stops research? By whom?

[gvsmovcd]

http://www.underwoodammo.com/40sandwp135grainjacketedhollowpointboxof50.aspx

IIRC - CorBon used to have some too.

That's why I don't see .40+P. It's normally called 10mm :0

[DocGKR]

"Basis is research examing one-shot stops of various calibers and loads. standard velocity 9mm performs more poorly than +P rated ammo on average."

This is absolutely NOT true. Please don't make such ignorant statements.

[ToddG]

The vast majority of 9mm pistols in production today were designed to run NATO-specification 9mm ammunition which is approximately the same as 9mm +p. I'd be very wary of any 9mm pistol that forbade +p ammo unless it was a very special purpose-built gun.

As JV correctly points out, there is no SAAMI spec for 9mm +p+ ... it is simply a way for ammo companies to identify ammunition as being above the 9mm +p MAP of 38,500psi. So one company could produce a 40kpsi +p+ load, another a 42kpsi load, and another a 100kpsi load and technically they're all +p+. Having said that, the ammo produced by the Big Three in 9mm +p+ was generally in the 40kpsi range, almost always pushing light bullets that provided a fair amount of case volume for powder.

Regarding heavy standard-pressure 9mm loads against lighter +p/+p+ loads, the changes in bullet technology over the past decade have really forced people to reexamine preconceived notions. Gone are the days when slow, heavy 147gr bullets would fail to expand and act like slow, heavy ice picks. Having said that, I still believe in the voodoo of speed and prefer to find a round that is both fast and meets DocGKR's standards for penetration and expansion.

[John Hearne]

Also, contrary to popular belief, the 357SIG doesn't have to wear guns out faster than .40 S&W... when I was at SIG we had an independent test run that showed there was less wear & tear on the gun from the 357 than the 40 for the same pistol (P229). It's simply a function of how the gun is designed.


Can you offer some more detail here? I would think that slide velocity and more specifically, its abrupt stop would be the major wear factor in a semi-automatic pistol. Is the slide velocity lower on 357 or is there something else at play (besides voodoo)?

[ToddG]

Here is the info I found in the letter we sent the agency that asked the question. I cannot reproduce the letter itself for obvious reasons:

Tests compared SIG P229 pistols in .40 S&W and 357SIG with new recoil springs. The .40 ammo used was 155gr Winchester Range (then-current USICE load) which is hot, but probably not as hot as the current 180gr Winchester FBI load. The 357 SIG load was the agency's 125gr Gold Dot. The .40 produced 24% higher peak slide velocity.

A second test used a recoil spring that had been subjected to 20,000 rounds of shooting prior to the test. Increase in slide velocity was 28% in 357 SIG and 14% in .40 S&W compared to their respective velocities with a new spring.



Slide Velocitiy
357 SIG
40 S&W


new spring
5.30 m/s
6.58 m/s


20k spring
6.80 m/s
7.50 m/s



These measurements were recorded with an Olympus iSpeed II High Speed Digital Camera shot at 3000 fps with 5x shutter.

Hope that helps.

[DocGKR]

The .40 155 gr is typically one of the hottest loads available and generates very fast slide velocities.

Having said that, I suspect .357 and .40 pistols typically have about the a similar lifespan--which will be much less than an equivalent pistol chambered in 9 mm...

Note that the current FBI contract .40 180 gr load had been substantially downloaded and in now quite anemic compared to its original form--so much so that the FBI contract 9 mm 147 gr loading likely offers similar if not better terminal ballistic performance...

[gvsmovcd]

This is absolutely NOT true. Please don't make such ignorant statements.

With all due respect, I don't appreciate being called ignorant. You're the one who demonstrates his ignorance if you are not familiar with the work that has been done to gather real shootings and look at the results. My stating the data that was produced from such studies is fact; it's what the data show. Take it for what you will. Please keep the ad hominens to yourself.

[DocGKR]

I am VERY familiar with wound ballistic data collection from both OIS shooting incidents and OCONUS combat results. You might wish to review my background, as placed online by DOD on page 2 of this open source briefing I presented at NDIA a few years ago: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf. You also might wish to review this analysis of a popular, but deeply flawed purported "one-shot stop studies": http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm. Keep in mind a variety of equally important methodologies are used for terminal performance testing, including actual shooting incident reconstruction, forensic evidence analysis, and post-mortem data and/or surgical findings; properly conducted ethical animal test results; and laboratory evaluations—this includes the use of tissue simulants proven to have correlation with living tissue. The past decade of OCONUS GWOT operations have provided a tremendous amount of combat derived terminal performance information. From 2002-2006, the U.S. government gathered numerous experts from a variety of disciplines, including military and law enforcement end-users, trauma surgeons, aero ballisticians, weapon and munitions engineers, and other scientific specialists to form the Joint Service Wound Ballistic Integrated Product Team to conduct a 4 year, 6 million dollar study to assessing terminal performance. The JSWB-IPT, FBI BRF, AFTE, and other similar groups get to assess an extensive amount of post-shooting forensic data. The whole raison d'être of these independent organizations is to interpret and disseminate information that will help LE and military personnel more safely and effectively perform their duties and missions. Over the past 15 years, especially since the closure of the non-profit IWBA, 95% of the cutting edge LE and military wound ballistic research is NOT available to the public or via the internet.

The largest independently verified study of bullet penetration and expansion characteristics in living human tissue has shown the 9mm 147 gr JHP to offer acceptable performance in law enforcement lethal force confrontations. A senior criminalist with the San Diego P.D., the late Mr. Eugene J. Wolberg, analyzed their 9 mm 147 gr JHP performance in 10% ordnance gelatin and compared the laboratory results with the actual terminal effects produced in human tissue in nearly 150 officer involved shootings with the San Diego Police Department. When I last spoke with Mr. Wolberg in May of 2000, the majority of their bullets have penetrated 13 to 15 inches and expanded between 0.60 to 0.62 inches in both human tissue and 10% ordnance gelatin. This appears to be ideal performance from a 9mm. San Diego PD switched to the 9mm 147 gr JHP when their lighter weight, higher velocity 9mm 115 gr JHP bullets had several failures to penetrate deeply enough to create damage to vital organs in the torso and cause rapid incapacitation.

Other large California agencies using the 9mm 147 gr JHP, such as LAPD, LASO, SCPD, SCSO, SJPD have had similar results. These and other left coast agencies successfully using the 9mm 147 gr JHP have thousands of officers with hundreds of officer involved shootings, all who have successfully used 9mm 147 gr JHP loads.

Perhaps the documented success of the 9mm 147 gr JHP in California is a result of differing laws of physics on the West Coast than in other areas. Unfortunately, that conjecture does not stand up to scrutiny as both the FBI BRF and the extensive Royal Canadian Mounted Police studies determined that the 9mm 147 gr JHP was the most effective load for the caliber. In addition, during the ammunition trials for the U.S. Military M11 pistol conducted by Navy Weapons Center Crane Indiana, the 9mm 147gr JHP was selected as the issue load for the M11, beating a variety of other 9mm JHP loads, including both standard pressure and +P pressure 115 gr and 124 gr JHP’s.

My calling you ignorant was NOT an ad hominen as you accuse, but rather a simple statement of fact--you simply don't know what you don't know, as your inaccurate comments about +P vs. standard pressure 9 mm aptly illustrates.

[Ed L]

With all due respect, I don't appreciate being called ignorant. You're the one who demonstrates his ignorance if you are not familiar with the work that has been done to gather real shootings and look at the results. My stating the data that was produced from such studies is fact; it's what the data show.

What specific work and studies are you referring to?

[John Hearne]

Hope that helps.

It does help and I appreciate the detail. I am absolutely fascinated by minutiae. I don't know enough physics to comment extensively but the results speak for themselves. I would have thought that the increased ft lb of energy associated with the 357 would have driven the slide faster than 40 S&W.

[PPGMD]

I know that my endurance with Sig is being tested. I helped a buddy order a new duty gun at the end of 2012 through their IOP program. I understand that the world is crazy and nobody was surprised when the pistol wasn't delivered until this week.

What did surprise us was that a duty gun was only shipped with two magazines despite the very clear and distinct product description in the IOP paperwork. My buddy called Sig's main number and was told that they didn't care what the paperwork said, he was not getting a 3rd magazine. I gave him the number our of our Federal rep. The Federal rep told him the same thing - sorry, don't care what the form says, you aren't getting a third magazine. My buddy was persistent and the rep finally agreed to take his address. The rep said he'd look around and see if he could find a used magazine to send.

I've had very mixed luck with Sig's "customer service" over the years. From horrible to great. I thought things were getting better but apparently not. If I wasn't required to carry a Sig by my employer, they would be dead to me after this escapade. My buddy has spent a lot of money, waited six months, and can't carry his new pistol because he only has one spare mag.

Though I think that they've stabilized their QC issues that they had in the past, Sig as a company has gone down hill. Customer service has become a major issue, almost Hk of the past level.

To me the telling thing that although Sig was a stage sponsor at Bianchi Cup (IIRC the second highest sponsor level) they didn't send a single sponsored shooter, nor did they send any sort of representative. Virtually ever other sponsor sent someone to the cup, generally someone of the executive level or higher along with their sponsored shooters. But Sig was completely absent, they paid a lot of money to wave the flag, but they didn't send anyone that would have to interact with their customers (the X5 All Around is actually a very good pistol for the Bianchi Cup).

I won't put words in people's mouths but I've heard similar comments from others about their experiences with dealing with Sig corporate.

[JDM]

Please consider all Pistol-Forum.com rules (http://pistol-forum.com/misc.php?do=showrules) while participating in discussion.



Members with an orange colored username are considered Subject Matter Experts, and should be given considerable deference.

From the rules:


III. A note about SMEs

Select members of the pistol-forum.com community have been granted the title Subject Matter Expert (SME). These are individuals with proven credentials within the community who directly influence firearms-related policy decisions for high profile law enforcement, military, and/or industry entities. These professionals are often highly compensated for their time and expertise, and pistol-forum.com greatly appreciates their generous participation here. As such, forum members are expected to treat all such SMEs with appropriate respect and deference.


Thank you.

[Sparks2112]

My research says 50 AE is 28.4% more effective incapacitating a charging Sea Bear when comparing it to the equivalent 147gr 9mm load.

No, I'm not an expert, but I did stay in a holiday inn express last night...

[DanH]

My research says 50 AE is 28.4% more effective incapacitating a charging Sea Bear when comparing it to the equivalent 147gr 9mm load.

No, I'm not an expert, but I did stay in a holiday inn express last night...

cite your source please.

I couldn't help myself :o

[NickA]

My research says 50 AE is 28.4% more effective incapacitating a charging Sea Bear when comparing it to the equivalent 147gr 9mm load.

No, I'm not an expert, but I did stay in a holiday inn express last night...

So 60% of the time, it works every time? :cool:

[gvsmovcd]

I am VERY familiar with wound ballistic data collection from both OIS shooting incidents and OCONUS combat results. You might wish to review my background, as placed online by DOD on page 2 of this open source briefing I presented at NDIA a few years ago: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf. You also might wish to review this analysis of a popular, but deeply flawed purported "one-shot stop studies": http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm.

Doc, a more educational and contributory post (for all readers) would be to point out that there is research and professional opinion that questions/disproves studies that examine one-shot stops for various calibers/loads. The fact that such studies exist though can't be denied. And it is hardly ignorant to cite them or speak to them on such a forum. I would love to hear about failures of methodology in such studies, etc. So do the whole forum community a service and respond originally with the post quoted above. Point out that readers should consider the validity of the methodology used for "so and so studies." That they should consider "so and so alternative study/s." That you have examined the data from studies that purport this and do not agree with such conclusions based on other research conclusions. But to just say it is NOT true and crying out that the poster is ignorant for commenting on something that data exist for only makes you appear ignorant and not bothering to contribute at all to the discussion. It also doesn't educate the forum participants about competing studies. Something that I would think is along the lines of your responsibility considering that you are being held up as an expert on this forum. Beyond such studies however, many LEO agencies have questioned the reliability of the 9mm load. The 1986 Miami shootout led to the FBI re-examing their caliber/load choice. The U.S. Border Patrol studies also speak of 9mm concerns, etc. It's what sparked a transition to the .40 S&W. So one-shot stop studies which report on standard velocity 9mm are far from the only source for questioning the effectiveness of 9mm standard velocity. I'm not trying to prove the inadquacy of the 9mm standard velocity or the validity of such one-shot stop sudies. I am only emphasizing that there has been research (perhaps flawed research) and LEO reports that cast doubt on it. Commenting on this is not ignornant and I welcome data/studies/knowledge that say different. My citing data you feel are not true (or that contain methodological flaws and hence questionable results), is a great opportunity to point out why they are not true and to make us all more knowledable.

[Byron]

Doc, a more educational and contributory post (for all readers) would be to point out that there is research and professional opinion that questions/disproves studies that examine one-shot stops for various calibers/loads. The fact that such studies exist though can't be denied. And it is hardly ignorant to cite them or speak to them on such a forum.
You've been asked three times, by two different posters, to cite the work that you keep referring back to. You have repeatedly failed to do so.

How do you expect people to intelligently discuss and refute your study (studies) if you will not cite them?

One of the reasons people keep asking is because we suspect that you are relying on outdated studies of questionable methodology. But unless you actually say what studies you are referencing, the best response you will get will point you to newer studies and new work in the field.

That you have the audacity to tell Doc how he could be more contributory, even after learning of his expertise in this matter, is offensive to me as a third party who has gained mountains of information from reading Doc's post on these (and other) forums. If you take some time to read through his stickied threads, for example, you'll find ample data and citations. The fact that he doesn't take the time to spell out every single concept in every single post that he makes is understandable, just as I wouldn't expect a surgeon to talk about basic anatomy every time he wants to discuss surgery.

[TCinVA]

Doc, a more educational and contributory post (for all readers) would be to point out that there is research and professional opinion that questions/disproves studies that examine one-shot stops for various calibers/loads.


Yes there is. And Doc is one of the people who contributed to that research and professional opinion.



But to just say it is NOT true and crying out that the poster is ignorant for commenting on something that data exist for only makes you appear ignorant and not bothering to contribute at all to the discussion.


You're new, so perhaps you don't yet understand what the orange letters in the name mean, or perhaps you don't grasp the significance of the letters SME under his name. Those letters stand for Subject Matter Expert. The person who has that title under their name has credentials that have been properly vetted...although it's pretty easy with DocGKR because he's a pretty well known fellow due to his efforts to share important information with the wider world.

We have an entire forum dedicated to terminal ballistics where all sorts of information is posted along with citations, run entirely by DocGKR. He has no need to justify himself to everybody who stumbles through the door and doesn't bother to read the rules of the forum or even look through the terminal ballistics forum.

If you have a disagreement and can back that disagreement with some citations and facts, then by all means have a disagreement in an appropriate and respectful manner. But don't show up, make silly assertions, and then get offended when someone who's got better data and more information comes along and just tells you flatly that you're wrong. Certainly don't go around telling our forum SME's they need to justify themselves to your satisfaction when they are contradicting your inaccurate conclusions. We won't tolerate it.

[Al T.]

Folks, lets use this as a teaching point. I've traded some PMs with gvsmovcd and, as we suspected, he/she was quoting some bad data. As this forum expands, we will be getting some new folks. As in new to guns. Not every new shooter will know who a SME actually is, so it behooves us to guide them appropriately.

Back in my TFL days, Pat Rogers started posting. Hilarity (not really) ensued as the rank and file had no idea who he was in real life. :)

[Symmetry]

My research says 50 AE is 28.4% more effective incapacitating a charging Sea Bear when comparing it to the equivalent 147gr 9mm load.

No, I'm not an expert, but I did stay in a holiday inn express last night...

"They've done studies you know.... It works 60% of the time, every time."

Anchor man line. :)

That being said, a 50 AE will make a larger, deeper hole.

[Sparks2112]

cite your source please.

I couldn't help myself :o

Season 3 Episode 57b Spongebob Squarepants. Top that ;)

[Jay]

Not every new shooter will know who a SME actually is, so it behooves us to guide them appropriately.


I have to respectfully disagree here somewhat, I joined this place as a 'new' shooter the day it went live (and have always felt guilty at the thought of possibly kitten blocking Jay Cuningham on his handle) after following pt.com in an effort to learn and better myself. As you can all see by my staggering post count I have been spending several years STFU'ing / Reading More & Posting Less. Unfortunately do to the Venn Diagram of Money/Time/Ammo Availability (Lately) I still consider myself a relatively new and unskilled shooter, yes I have lots of toys but I am by no means proficient enough to regard any of them as tools, yet. But I also feel that I am no longer ignorant do to the community here and their willingness to share there fount of experience with all of us.

All this being said YOU DO NOT walk into someones home and start being rude, I still have a lot to learn in regards to marksmanship and gun handling but when it comes to people I am very well versed you either have some level of tact and/or class or you do not.

[jetfire]

Cylinder turns the wrong way.

Blasphemer!

[DocGKR]

gvsmovcd: My initial post was short and to the point, as I did not have a lot of time and I did not want any innocent reader to be deceived by your inaccurate comment: "Basis is research examing one-shot stops of various calibers and loads. standard velocity 9mm performs more poorly than +P rated ammo on average."

I am unaware of ANY (as in NONE) valid "one-shot stop" studies assessing civilian self-defense shootings, LE OIS incidents, or military combat results. Since NO such accurate or useful studies exist and the conclusion you wrote is not true, your comments seemed quit uninformed, thus I wrote: "This is absolutely NOT true. Please don't make such ignorant statements.".

When I had time later, I amplified upon my initial comment. Keep in mind that none of what I wrote is new information and anyone paying careful attention to terminal performance issues over the past 20-30 years would already be conversant with everything I stated. You simply did not know, what you did not know; however, that makes it difficult to have an informed discussion.

Now in the late 1980's, 9 mm ammunition did have problems with inadequate penetration when it expanded, failure to expand through heavy clothing, and poor intermediate barrier capabilities. As noted, those problems were a major reason for the development of the .40 S&W cartridge. But a decade or two of modern terminal performance research coupled with improved engineering and production practices at ammunition manufacturers have resulted in a a superb generation of 9 mm projectiles that offer penetration in the ideal range and that are capable of good performance after common intermediate barriers. As many agencies are discovering, modern robust expanding, barrier blind 9 mm ammunition is performing on par with larger caliber handgun loads, but offers substantial fiscal and training benefits. In test after test, most officers demonstrate a higher qualification score when shooting 9 mm compared to other common service calibers. Smaller statured officers and those with small hands tend to shoot better with 9 mm. Service pistols tend to be more durable in 9 mm than those in .357 Sig and .40 S&W. In a time of fiscal austerity, 9 mm ammunition is certainly less expensive. For most LE duties, there are a lot of advantages in carrying a 9 mm: easy to shoot--especially one handed, relatively inexpensive to practice with, lots of bullets immediately on tap. Several of the largest proponents of .40 S&W are now contemplating returning to 9 mm--in large part due to premature service life failures of their .40 pistols and decreased qualification scores when their personnel shoot .40 pistols. I suspect in the near future it is likely that many LE agencies will shift back to 9 mm given the benefits noted above.

[ToddG]

The biggest issue with the most highly publicized "one shot stop" work -- apart from accusations that the core data may have been false or even falsified -- is the inherent illogic of the measurement.

Why do people shoot people? To make them stop fighting/resisting/etc..

So if you only count those instances in which one hit was scored, you are by definition discounting every single instance in which two or more hits were needed to stop the threat. We've had people with significant real world combat experience on this forum relate tales of both bad guys and good guys who not only survived multiple hits from rifle rounds but continued to fight effectively. So how in the world is anyone supposed to believe that a 9mm handgun round of any type has a 94% chance to make people "stop" with one hit?

[WDW]

I'll say this from my own limited experience. In some cases, if a person WANTS to keep going, despite grievous injury, all logic & while defying all medical evidence to the contrary, they will. Adrenaline & strength of will are powerful tools.

Case & point, 1st Sgt Kasal in Irag who was shot 7 times & took shrapnel & concussion from a grenade took his M9 to slide lock & still walked out on his own two feet (albeit, assisted by 2 fellow marines) w/his pistol in his hand.
http://i865.photobucket.com/albums/ab217/10mm4me/image-8_zpse6df8dae.jpg (http://s865.photobucket.com/user/10mm4me/media/image-8_zpse6df8dae.jpg.html)

[Ed L]

To build on what ToddG and others have said, the once popular writings that claimed to measure one-shot stops were grossly flawed because they deliberately excluded the most common one-shot failures: situations where one shot is fired and it fails to stop someone so additional shots need to be fired.

Their one shot stop numbers are meaningless because they do not factor situations when one shot was not enough to stop someone and more shots had to be fired.

Successes are meaningless unless you factor in failures. And the one-shot stop numbers that some people have touted do not factor in a major number of failures. Therefore these one-shot stop claims have no validity.

Here are some links that address this in depth.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/sanow-strikes-out.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/undeniable-evidence.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm

[Tamara]

What does .357 Sig offer over 9 mm in typical duty and CCW use--I mean besides the increased cost, decreased ammunition availability, reduced pistol service life, increased blast, decreased magazine capacity, etc...?

When the locusts clean the shelves out on election day (which seems to have become a recurring thing) 9mm is the first to go. Thus, when I added a third M&P FS, I went with a .357 instead of another 9. Now I need to get a .40 barrel for it and lay back a case or so each of .40 and .357SIG in the "IN CASE OF PANIC BUYING, BREAK GLASS" stash.

If this 9 drought goes on another two or three months, I might be glad to have options. ;)

[Desmond82]

Referring back to the discussion about 147 gr 9mm, what was the performance difference between 147 gr vs. 147 gr +p?

If I remember correctly the preferred option is standard 147 gr, so I was just curious too why that was the case.

[Sparks2112]

Referring back to the discussion about 147 gr 9mm, what was the performance difference between 147 gr vs. 147 gr +p?

If I remember correctly the preferred option is standard 147 gr, so I was just curious too why that was the case.

The 147 pushed faster over expanded slightly iirc, I should remember seeing as I'm the one who sent him the P9hst4 to test in the first place.

ETA: New-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Tests
http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?t=7205

[DocGKR]

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?7205-New-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Tests

[Sparks2112]

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?7205-New-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Tests

Yeah, that. :)

[Desmond82]

Thanks for the links

[Tamara]

The 147 pushed faster over expanded slightly iirc, I should remember seeing as I'm the one who sent him the P9hst4 to test in the first place.

ETA: New-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Tests
http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?t=7205

I had hoped some years back that the continued viability of .357SIG might encourage development of 147gr .355" bullets designed to function properly at something faster than a walking pace, but this was because I thought those projectiles would work swimmingly when stuffed over hot .38 Super loads.

Then I gave up, turned my back on my former gun hipster identity, and sold all my magic chamberings* and started carrying the nine like some common pleb.


*Even the 10mm, which everybody knows is the ultimate gun hipster cartridge.

[TCinVA]

The 10mm cannot be the ultimate hipster cartridge. It was carried by James "Sonny" Crockett (I carry a Bren...you've probably never heard of it) in a shoulder holster while he wore Ray-Bans and wicker shoes.

...wait...no...NO! DAMN YOU MICHAEL MANN!!! DAMN YOU TO PUSS-GUTTED HELL!!!!!

[rudy99]

At one point in time early in my shooting career, 357sig seemed like a good idea. Now, kind of like Tam, ammo availability (i.e., no 9mm or 45acp) is the only reason I'd pick this caliber.

Does anyone have any thoughts/comments on Paul Howe's observations (http://www.combatshootingandtactics.com/published/info-letters/11/CSATUpdate_Nov11.pdf) regarding 357SIG reliability due to the necked down cartridge?


I have been shooting the G32 as my primary work gun for some time. I changed
ranges for this class and we started on the LE range which has 24 points and is
where we train the two-day class. Due to the drought, there is much sand on my
grass ranges. After starting my demos, I had several failures to feed and magazines
jamming with the .357 sig caliber. I cleaned my gun and stripped all the mags,
cleaning them and replacing any springs that looked short. The next day I did more
shooting and had the same problems to include a few demos during the student class.
What I found is that the .357 magazines are incredibly sensitive to sand. The bottle
neck shape of the cartridge in the magazine will lock the magazine up with
sometimes one trip to the ground. I immediately brought out my backup G19’s as
they fit all my holsters and mag pouches. I test the 9mm mags by dropping them
into sand/talc type dirt and then covering them up with sand. I picked them up,
shook the dirt off and depressed the top round a couple of times to anything out and
then shot them without a hitch. My best guess is that a “straight” case such as 9mm, .40, .45 will feed more reliably
dirty than the .357 will. Knowing this, I will use my .357’s now for training and dry
fire on “clean” ranges and then use my G19’s for demos/training with students.
Knowing this, I would not take a .357 round into a sandy environment as you would
have to constantly do maintenance on the mags to keep the gun running.

[ToddG]

That may be true for the Glock mags. Given the number of federal, state, and local LE agencies that issue P229 and P226 pistols in 357 SIG and the number of them that use dirt/sand pits for some or all of their training, I would not say it's universally true for the cartridge.

[GJM]

Can anyone that has dropped a .357 Sig barrel into their 229 in .40 comment on whether there was a change in point of impact? A few years ago, when I was flirting with .357 Sig, for potential as a penetrating load around critters, I got a HK .357 Sig barrel for the P2000. In both my P2000 pistols, I had a noticable shift in POI -- mostly in windage. Not sure if that is something with the cartridge, the P2000, or just my barrel/pistol?

[DocGKR]

When switching barrels, even in the same caliber, we frequently observe shifts in POI.

[ToddG]

A shift in windage is odd.

I cannot speak for current practice, but when I was at SIG they ordinarily used sights on the 40-cal gun that printed 2" higher at 25yd than the 9mm/357 sights. So a .40 slide shot POA with .40 and high with 357, while a 357 slide shot POA with 357 and 2" low with .40 S&W.