By what I've personally seen, as it relates to the 9/357.Originally Posted by SWAT Lt.
By what I've personally seen, as it relates to the 9/357.
Federal 115 & 115+p, 147 Hydra shock and 147 gold dot.
So, given that you're comparing apples to oranges, you agree it would be incredibly flawed to draw the conclusion that 357 SIG is dramatically more effective than 9mm?
What's ironic is that the first 3 9mm loads your agency used were not FBI/IWBA compliant. The 357 SIG rounds your agency uses are, and you rave about their performance, yet question the efficacy of the FBI/IWBA standards.
Gotta scratch my head on that one
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
During the early to mid 1980’s, like many people, I was duped by articles singing the praises of the .357 Mag 125 gr JHP. I carried a 4” 686 and a customized 3” M13 loaded with Fed 125 gr JHP. However, after going on active military duty and being in a position to test ammunition at the Letterman Army Institute of Research with Dr. Fackler, it became obvious that the .357 Magnum 125 gr JHP’s tended to have relatively shallow penetration, frequently fragmented with resultant decrease in permanent crush cavity, and had temporary cavities of insufficient size to contribute significantly to wounding. In addition, these loads had a large muzzle flash and blast, as well as a relatively harsh recoil which inhibited accuracy and re-engagement speed. As the FBI established a science based ammunition testing program, their research data also showed less than stellar performance from the lightweight .357 Mag loadings, including the 125 gr JHP’s. For those individuals who doubt evidence based research and prefer “street results”, the CHP, the largest agency to issue .357 Mag 125 gr JHP’s on the West Coast, clearly reports significantly better results in their officer involved shootings since switching to .40 S&W 180 gr JHP loadings, based on officer perception, objective crime scene measurements, as well as the physiological damage described in the relevant autopsy studies. The CHP used a variety of .357 Mag loads, depending upon what was available via the state contract. According to the published CHP test data from 1989-90, the .357 Magnum load used immediately prior to the CHP transition to .40 S&W was the Remington 125 gr JHP with an ave. MV of 1450 f/s from their duty revolvers. I first saw the data when it was presented during a wound ballistic conference I attended at the CHP Academy in the early 1990's; I heard it discussed again at a CHP Officer Involved Shootings Investigation Team meeting in November of 1997 at Vallejo, CA. The information reviewed the differences in ammunition terminal performance such as penetration depth, recovered bullet characteristics, tissue damage and other physiological measurements and physical evidence detailed during forensic analysis.
There is great value in the use appropriately gathered and interpreted surgical and/or post-mortem data. The IWBA published some of Gene Wolberg’s material from his study of San Diego PD officer involved shootings that compared bullet performance in calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin with the autopsy results using the same ammunition. When I last spoke with Mr. Wolberg in May of 2000, he had collected data on nearly 150 OIS incidents which showed the majority of the 9mm 147 gr bullets fired by officers had penetrated 13 to 15 inches and expanded between 0.60 to 0.62 inches in both human tissue and 10% ordnance gelatin. Several other agencies with strong, scientifically based ammunition terminal performance testing programs have conducted similar reviews of their shooting incidents with much the same results. There is an extremely strong correlation between properly conducted and interpreted 10% ordnance gelatin laboratory studies and the physiological effects of projectiles in actual shooting incidents. That is the reason why LE agencies such as the FBI, CHP, LAPD, SJPD, RCMP, etc… as well as military organizations like the JSWB-IPT, CTTSO-TSWG, NSWC Crane, USMC, and USSOCOM continue to rely on properly conducted 10% gelatin studies when selecting ammunition for use in lethal force encounters.
Given all the wound ballistic data that has been published over the past three decades, I am surprised regarding the continued amount of misinformation being perpetuated about this subject, especially in light of the voluminous results available from CONUS OIS incidents, as well as OCONUS combat results. 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 testing--this includes the use of tissue simulants proven to have correlation with living tissue. Some individuals seem to be under the mistaken impression that one of these areas is more important than others--this is not the case, as each category provides important information to researchers. The JSWB-IPT, FBI BRF, AFTE, and other such organizations get to assess an extensive amount of post-shooting forensic data. The whole raison d'ętre of these independent, non-profit organizations is to interpret and disseminate information that will help LE and military personnel more safely and effectively perform their duties and missions.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
I accept the fact 357 sig and 9mm are relatively equivalent. From an academic perspective, I don't really understand why though. 357 sig and 9mm bullets are the same diameter, and in the case of the 124+p and 125, the same weight and sectional density. All things being equal (same effort of design, optimization, weight, sectional density, etc.), wouldn't we expect the higher energy bullet to be able to do SOMETHING better? I.e. a bit more penetration or expansion? If both are penetrating and expanding the same, it would seem the "efficiency" of the 9mm is much better, as it can do the same work with less energy.
This is purely an academic question, but I think its an interesting one... We see an increase in the performance of the 124 gold dot to the 124+p. Shouldn't we expect a similar linear increase in performance with the 357? Not night and day, but an increase none the less?
I hope you have this saved somewhere. That was a great time consuming and an amazing contribution. Should be sticky.
I had involvement in an OIS at the beginning of the year where officers from another agency used 125 grain Gold Dots in .357 SIG.
The suspect was shot multiple times center mass, with some of the bullets exiting the back. One round ricocheted off the suspects head without penetrating. I was sure the suspect was dead, but he actually lived....he’ll be miserable for the rest of his life though.
There were some guys from the other agency that we’re surprised with the performance from the .357 SIGs, because they were taught that it was some sort of death ray. To me, it seemed to perform about like everything else I’ve seen.
Doc— Appreciate the detailed posts.
Many factors are involved in any shootings with all calibers. I wouldn't choose my caliber, based on one incident.
Has anyone heard of any Departments switching FROM 357sig? I'm sure that there are some, somewhere, but certainly not anywhere near the other calibers.
Most Departments that carry 357sig are very happy with their choice, including the US SECRET SERVICE, who stated that the 357sig was the best handgun round that they have ever tested.
I also think it's funny how everyone could agree that the 357magnum is clearly better then the. 38, but think that 357sig is no different then a hot 9mm.
Last edited by dpadams6; 11-28-2017 at 12:47 AM.
Lightest to the heaviest Common rounds. What about the 147 gd that many swear by?So, given that you're comparing apples to oranges, you agree it would be incredibly flawed to draw the conclusion that 357 SIG is dramatically more effective than 9mm?
What's ironic is that the first 3 9mm loads your agency used were not FBI/IWBA compliant. The 357 SIG rounds your agency uses are, and you rave about their performance, yet question the efficacy of the FBI/IWBA standards.
Speer 9mm 124gr Gold Dot (53618) has 179 lbs less energy than .357 Sig (54234) and 9mm 124gr +P Gold Dot (53617) has 96 lbs less. But each seems to perform very close in testing protocols, close enough to call them essentially equals. It would seem the testing protocol doesn't account for this? I'll be the first to say that I have no freaking clue as to what test medium or protocol would account for the actual effectivity, but the energy difference is a very real thing.
Also a very popular internet ammunition vendor is currently pricing .357 Sig #54234 cheaper than 124 +P Gold Dot 53617 as of about 4 minutes ago. Heck, it's cheaper than most have FMJ priced at. Backing up the truck on .357 Sig ammo is probably a good idea. Even Sig Sauer appears to be ditching it since they've dropped offering it in a couple of pistol models. All of this said, I rely on 9mm over .357 Sig because it just makes more sense from an availability standpoint. I grab the .357 Sig or magnum when I go hunting though. Every...single...time.
Reply With Quote