Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyF
I once read somewhere that glock's in .357 SIG were only rated to about a 15,000 round lifespan. Wish I could recall the source.
|
I'd have to agree. Of course besides SIG themselves, I see probably about half a dozen guns tha that now fire .357 SIG rounds and definately would not rate them as well as a regular firearm (standard, not firing .357 SIG). Just looking at the data along from an engineering standpoint makes me wonder what the lifespan of a firearm in that caliber would. Pressure/velocity/energy is quite a bit for any gun, and that caliber is quite alot of each.
This thread slightly reminds me of a story my friend once told me.
During an "operation" as a Ranger (2 BT) he was in Iraq. He encounter Haj on the the run for the first instance. Him, amongst 3 others fire about 7 rounds at Haj running along with a RPG7. They could see several hits, but Haj kept running. They went and followed him after their shots, to only find out out that all 7 rounds hit him. He had keeled over and bled to death as a result.
The next time on their deployment, their platoon leader had an M1A. Fired two rounds at Haj as he was running away. Only one round hit him, dropped immediately from a knee shot, and bled to death.
This situation he told me about reminded about the difference between and AK/AR. While the rounds weren't exactly the same (being an AK/AR, not M1A), I quickly realized that there is is a difference between penetration and damage.
Velocity is very important, but is by NO means the deciding factor. A far slower round, that is big, can cause much more damage.