.45 vs. .357

[The Drew]

Originally Posted by MettleOfMan

Hi folks,

I'm absolutely new to this forum and found it by accident while researching the .357 Sig. I'm a rifleman at my core so pistols are secondary but I recognize the need and practice with them as much as possible so as to be able to deal with any situation that arises that should require deadly force. Oh, before I get going... my local range is home to many of the Federal Air Marshalls since their office is about 200 yards from it and last night I had the pleasure of walking in behind them while their targets were still in the shuttles. The guy I walked in behind had just scored a whopping 190. That's 190 out of 300 folks and the 5 ring on their target is quite large. I'm not poking fun but I shoot with these guys a lot and I've tried time and again to ask them why don't they slow down and learn to shoot before they try to race. I know that slinging lead is fun but it's a very serious occupation and you should strive to hit exactly what you intend to before you engage. Maybe that's the ex Recon Scout coming out in me.

Back to the .357 versus the 9 versus the .40 S&W. I carry all 3 of these pistols and for different reasons. The .357 was chosen by the Secret Service as their sidearm so all of the Treasury Department, Homeland Security, and TSA people get this round. They chose it based on penetration because they may have to shoot through car doors, airplane seat backs, etc. I carry a Sig 229 in .357 Sig when I'm on my motorcycle because my biggest danger is generally drivers with road rage. A .40 may well penetrate the windshield at the proper angle or a car door but it's risky whereas the .357 Sig has a much better potential. A .357 magnum would be more appropriate but I need concealment and a 229 is what I shoot several times a week. When I'm in a situation where soft targets would be the threat I choose the .40 S&W for greater frontal area and less penetration and collateral damage.

Now then I am indeed in the market for a .45 ACP. At least I think I am. I generally make a 2 inch ragged hole with 200 rounds at the range at distances less than 15 and I'll open up to 5 inches at the 25 but that seems to be reasonable compared to shooters around me. My question would be whether it is worth buying a .45 for sport use and accurate target shooting or should I stick with my .40 since the ballistics are comparable? It's a lot of money but I really liked .45s.

Thanks... and I'm glad to be here.

Ran

The reason the sky marshalls don't slow down is because they are training to be gunfighters NOT bullseye shooters. action (defensive) shooting is a completely different animal than standing slow fire at 25 yards.... Go to an IDPA shoot sometime and compete, and you'll see what I mean.

[MettleOfMan]

Originally Posted by The Drew

The reason the sky marshalls don't slow down is because they are training to be gunfighters NOT bullseye shooters. action (defensive) shooting is a completely different animal than standing slow fire at 25 yards.... Go to an IDPA shoot sometime and compete, and you'll see what I mean.

Hi, and thanks for the feedback. I would agree to that to a point, however I firmly believe one must learn to shoot before they can learn to shoot fast. If I'm mistaken and they actually do learn to shoot then something is wrong with much of their selection criteria for folks who are supposed to be able to disable a threat while that threat is surrounded by civilians. Believe me when I say I understand the need to have fast target acquisition and engagement but all of that means very little if you can't hit the target. I'm not talking about the person who can hit the B27 in the 5 ring, which is ungainly large by the way. I'm talking about the guy who just shot a 169 out of 300! That person has no business operating a firearm in the vicinity of any innocent bystanders, especially with a .357 Sig that is likely to continue killing people as it passes through the first and on to the second.

Anyway, thanks for the info and I may try IDPA sometime but what do you think about the firearm for that kind of shooting? I see that guns-ammo has a Para ordnance 1911 PXT stainless with fiber optic front sight and novac rear on sale for $757 down from $1125. That seems like a good deal but what do you think? It's been years since I carried a .45 and they were made loose to operate in mud and sand so I have no experience with a newer model. I won't get into what I do but I carry a .357 Sig as well.

thanks
Ran

[The Drew]

My point actually is that while some skills between slow fire and action shooting cross over, most skills that are valuable in one are a detriment in the other.

I believe that they are mostly two separate skill sets and one can be learned without the other. I.E. one may be an excellent fast shooter that is combat accurate, however that same individual may worse in slow fire exercises. That doesn't make him any less of a combat shooter.

[MettleOfMan]

Originally Posted by The Drew

My point actually is that while some skills between slow fire and action shooting cross over, most skills that are valuable in one are a detriment in the other.

I believe that they are mostly two separate skill sets and one can be learned without the other. I.E. one may be an excellent fast shooter that is combat accurate, however that same individual may worse in slow fire exercises. That doesn't make him any less of a combat shooter.

That makes perfect sense and I think you are right. The things I see going wrong I honestly think I could attribute to a person by looking at them but I'm not supposed to do that in today's politically correct society. That's not to say that the most non obvious person can't shoot but some things go hand in hand. Last night I tried my heart out to work with one of the FAMS on their 25 yard behind cover shooting but they panicked every time. The drill was, from a holstered position behind cover, draw and assume a shooting position and fire 3 rounds all in 10 seconds. They shot every drill in 6 seconds or less even though I stood behind them counting seconds out loud. The results on paper were pretty disastrous at 25 but they did a lot better at 7.5 even in 2 and 1 drills. I dunno but I'll keep working with them.

Flinching and trigger control (low and left) seems to be the biggest issue that I see and I'm thinking that perhaps slow controlled shooting to build up their shooting confidence might be a first step. I've asked them what they think they are doing wrong and generally I get "I don't know" but it's obvious to me behind them. What do you think about learning confidence first and then working on the drills? I've seen them look at their guns after a round as if it was the guns fault! Oh, and "cheap ammo" is heard across the range time and again... I don't know... I don't work for them but I work with them and I'm just trying to help.

And thanks for any input you might have. Even dry firing drills at home using door frames is reasonable in my mind.

Ran

[rimshoes]

I shot a .45 when I was in my 20's. Loved it. I got older and changed to a .357 sig and loved it. Now I am getting so damn old I am shooting a 9 mm. I still love the 9mm and it has been around for decades. When I get to the point that I start shooting a .380 (which by the way I got as a christmas present) I will know I am pretty much done carry/ conceal.

Question: Who manufactures the .357 sig besides Sig, Glock, H&K and Springfield.

I have never seen a Smith, a Colt or a Walther in 357 Sig.
The baby desert eagle would be a great candidate, they are disinterested.
Tauras, Beretta and the like have dropped thier lines in 357 Sig.

Remember the 38 super and the 10 mm ? Let us not see the 357 sig go to this end. Go buy some 357 sig ammo, give it as a present, store it, whatever.
Write your favorite gun manufacturer and tell them you want a gun chambered in 357 sig. Hell, write your congress rep !!!

Apparently there is a new cartridge for the pistol comming. Rumor has it the new one will be a .327 Magnum.

I will never own a 5.7. It is WAY to expensive, the caliber is available for one pistol manufacturer and the law wants it gone. Besides I have read the loads are now so impotent that it is like shooting a 22 magnum.

Hell, I hope I never end up with a 22 LR for conceal/ carry.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by rimshoes

Remember the 38 super and the 10 mm ? Let us not see the 357 sig go to this end.

hey now...the 10mm is alive and well.

just because there aren't a whole lot of guns chambered for it doesn't mean it's dead.

after all, given that it is pretty much impossible to make a better 10mm pistol than the glock 20, it's no wonder not many other manufacturers bother trying.

seriously, though, 10mm is far from dead.

and...welcome to the forum!

[rimshoes]

I really hope you are right. The super 38 is not dead, it is just in a comma.
The 10 mm is not on the morphine drip yet it sure is not an every day round. Every time I shoot a Glock I shoot it in the upper parts of the targets. It is the grip angle and I can not get used to it.
Hey, would not it be wonderful if they made a .357 out of the 10 mm case.
Sorta like the 357 sig from the 40 (well not exactly). They could call it the .357 sig magnum What do ya think ?????

And I was WRONG. There is a Smith and Wesson .357 sig. it is the M&P (military and police) model. No hammer, polymer frame and its ugly. I just got a Star Ultrastar 9mm with a polymer frame. The first gun I have ever owned with a polymer frame. I kinda like it. I just have to remember to keep it away from any dogs. I hear they love to chew on the polymer frames. lol

[rimshoes]

To throw a monkey in the works, here is another few questions.

Remember the 7.62 by 25 round ? There was ONE pistol (as far as I know) made for the round and it is ancient. Yet, one can find the ammo about a well as 10 mm ammo and it is not too expensive. Why is there not a gun manufacturer making this one in todays market ?

One more question. Has anyone heared of a round called the .400 Cor-Bon ??
I saw this round on some website when I was looking for 357 sig information.
It looks like the 357 sig, but .043 larger.

You all have a Merry Christmas

[Black Deadrick]

Gentlemen, I am new here. I am a veteran of the Army, 101st Airborne. I checked into this site trying to research a Springfield XD 357 Sig I recently purchased. I used to carry an XD 9mm. I am finding some highly intelligent responses in this thread and am liking this XD 357 Sig more and more. I like power, recoil and penetration. My question is, to anyone who might know. Earlier spoken of was a semi-auto pistol life span of 15k rounds put through it with 357 Sig. Would this also be true for the Springfield XD 357 Sig with 5" barrel especially made for this round? The one I bought only has 500 rounds through it. I would say that even with only 14.5k to go, the stopping power of this weapon would be worth it. Assuming I can replace damaged parts easily. Also, I read in here how this is supposed to be a difficult round to obtain, however, it seems currently this round is easy to obtain, including your local Wal-Mart. Only problem is, is that it is a bit pricey anywhere you go. I appreciate any feedback. Thank you.

[Black Deadrick]

I have just found quite an interesting review. Enjoy.
http://www.gunblast.com/RKCampbell_357Sig.htm