If considering a 40cal.. why not the 357 sig?

Discussion in 'Vintage Topic Archive (Sept - 2009)' started by JasonJ, Feb 20, 2008.

  1. JasonJ

    JasonJ Member

    340
    0
    thats my question.

    how does everybody feel about these two calibers and the way the compare?

    it seems to me, in a defensive handgun, the round count is about the same, the 357sig puts down a bit more power, with better penetration..
     
  2. if you stick solely to those criteria, sure the .357 sig looks more attractive. However, also consider the other uses for the pistol. Will you be plinking with it or doing other general shooting, or will it be solely a carry/defense piece? If the former you need to consider ammo cost and availability .
     

  3. TnShooter83

    TnShooter83 Guest

    I think...
    They crammed all they could in a SimiAuto.
    In order to keep weight and size down.
    And to add the extra rounds over a revolver.

    Smaller+Power= More Chamber pressure and more snappier recoil. I don't have a problem with recoil. I loved my 44mag, and shoot my 357mag ALOT.

    I do how ever have a problem with a chamber that is not fully supported.

    That siad,I'd own one, but not reload it more than a couple times...if that.

    My answer is .357Sig. If you're buying it for the "power" then get the power. If to plink... then I think the 9mm is great for plinking.
     
  4. Ari

    Ari Guest

    I think the 40 will be cheaper to shoot. Esp if you start to reload.. With all the farrell cases you can find at the range. :lol: But I think the 357sig would be fun to work with. I have not shot them side by side like I have with the 9mm 40 and 45.

    But it you look at the gel tests like this one you can see that there is not a real big difference from the 40 to the 357sig.



    [​IMG]