125g .357 Sig = to .125g .357 Magnum?

[Edg]

The .357Sig tends to be in the same area as the rest when it comes to penetration. With its additional velocity it usually opens sooner thus it starts losing velocity sooner at a greater rate.



The only advantage the .357Sig has over the standard 9mm is additional energy and momentum - both due to the increase in velocity.

When it comes to standard pistol cartridges like the 9mm, .357Sig, 40S&W, 45ACP, 45GAP - there is virtually no difference in terminal performance. The only real differences are smaller holes versus bigger holes, higher capacities versus lessor capacities, and prices per individual cartridge.

The error of this image is the fact that only the .357 sig is drivin to 1375fps...even though any of the other bullets shown except the 45 could and do commercially reach this speed. So why show a 1375fps 357 and not a 1450 fps 40 s&W or a 1400fps 9mm +p+. Or a 1600 fps 10mm?

[mpan72]

The error of this image is the fact that only the .357 sig is drivin to 1375fps...even though any of the other bullets shown except the 45 could and do commercially reach this speed. So why show a 1375fps 357 and not a 1450 fps 40 s&W or a 1400fps 9mm +p+. Or a 1600 fps 10mm?

Aren't they common velocities for the loads tested? I am not sure but they look like what I am used to seeing out of commercial ammo with those weight bullets.

[knight0334]

The error of this image is the fact that only the .357 sig is drivin to 1375fps...even though any of the other bullets shown except the 45 could and do commercially reach this speed. So why show a 1375fps 357 and not a 1450 fps 40 s&W or a 1400fps 9mm +p+. Or a 1600 fps 10mm?

I can cherry-pick loads with a .32-20 that can shadow all of the standard cartridges that I mentioned prior.

75fps probably wouldn't make a difference in the results. Yes, it would have been going faster, thus having more energy and more momentum - but that can be counterproductive when it opens faster and sooner within the target.

The difference between a 125gr bullet going 1375fps and 1450fps is 59FTLB's(basically a .22short's energy). There isn't a badguy in the world that will be able to tell the difference.



You are also faulting in your assumption that every .357Sig load rated at 1450fps will actually do 1450fps in your designated gun. There can be deviations even within the same gun - not to mention different individual guns of the same make & model, and between different manufacturers. The SAAMI spec for the .357Sig is a 125gr bullet at 1350fps with a 15" barrel- see page 2 of 5 from SAAMI's site. Anything over 1350fps is just gravy.

Also, as shown here in some real world tests of velocities, you can see that 1375 is still within the scope of operation for 125gr loads in a 4" barrel(common length for carry guns) - http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357sig.html

[gummy jones]

this thread has been there and back again and no one is talking about 10mm? how about 15rds of it in a glock 20sf? any takers?

yea youre right, lets not go there. now wheres that dead horse?

[ICEN]

I have seen UNDERWOOD ammo 125g .357 Sig on youtube tested and it was reaching in the 1500's in terms of fps.

I can't remember what Underwood said the fps was, I think it was supposed to be something like 1450 but instead when they guy shot the .357 Sig 125g Underwood out of his glock 32 it was reaching 1513fps and even a bit above that.

It is my understanding that the glock 31 is bigger than the glock 32 right? So out of a glock 31 it should have gained even more fps I assume unless the barrels are the same length?

The problem with the gel test though is that there are no bones, ect that humans have. So sometimes I think that the more fps might help if your hitting bones, ect.

But then sometimes I was thinking the faster a bullet hits the more it expands and slows down but then sometimes it seems the other way around.
I see some test that go back and forth.

But I know if you type up .357 Sig Underwood Gel test it the video will probably pop up. I can't remember the guys name who does the test I remember his name ends with a 9, but that ammo was reaching over 1513 fps in 125g .357 Sig.

I want to see what Corbon 125g .357 Sig can do since they have around 1450 fps I do believe.

[sohryu76]

I'll stick with my 9mm.
It can win against and AR it seems.

How about that shot placement argument?

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...fter-overnight

And the difference between you and someone like me is you don't know what you're talking about. And use weird examples to prove a point. I'm talking 9mm. As are a lot of other people. You keep using 22 cal in your Arguments.
If you really wanted best you'd be looking at 10mm.

[ICEN]

I'll stick with my 9mm.
It can win against and AR it seems.

How about that shot placement argument?

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...fter-overnight

And the difference between you and someone like me is you don't know what you're talking about. And use weird examples to prove a point. I'm talking 9mm. As are a lot of other people. You keep using 22 cal in your Arguments.
If you really wanted best you'd be looking at 10mm.

Well I tried to open that link but I am downloading stuff so it wouldn't let me open it so I have no clue whats in that link.

I use weird examples to prove a point? No I use real life examples to prove a point.

Let me ask you again. How is this a weird example?
If robber shoots you in your right leg with a .22 then shoots you in your left leg with a .45acp which do you expect to have higher chances of stopping the threat? The .45 acp common sense. How is this a weird example its a real life example that is common sense.

First off I have another thread where people were talking about .22's way more than this thread so I might have gotten the threads mixed up but I do recall someone at the begging of this thread saying .22.

But I can still bring up .22 for a reason.
The reason I can bring up .22 is because people keep saying shot placement.

If shot placement is not equally important as caliber than why am I not allowed to talk about .22 after all you keep saying shot placement!!!
I am agreeing with you saying if you want shot placement then go use a .22 but all you are doing is saying I can't bring up a .22 for an argument???

If your saying its all about shot placement then I can perfectly talk about using a .22 because if you have good shot placement it doesn't matter which gun or caliber you have which is why I am saying why not carry a BB gun since its all about shot placement?

Okay I will not even use .22 as an argument since the shot placement you talk about is no good with a .22 so you use a 9mm's go figure?
Let me ask you this : if its all about shot placement why do you carry a 9mm instead of a .22 or .380? After all that extra power in the 9mm has no use if you have good shot placement right???

I know why you carry a 9mm and not a .380 simply because it delivers more power if you miss vital spots don't sit here and act like its because of shot placement other wise you would be happy with a .25

WHY DON'T I GET A 10mm???

Well if you want to know the 10mm was one of the calibers I was going to get. I was either going to get a .357 Mag, 10mm or .357 Sig.
I decided that a 10mm will have more recoil there for I may be better with the .357 Sig. Yes the 10mm is way better than the Sig and the magnum but I probably won't be able to shoot it as good as the Sig from what I have seen on videos.

It is still in my top three choices.

Shot placement matters only when you hit, being that its proven most rounds on target do not hit vital spots I want a more powerful bullet that I can control.

I would choose a .500 S&W if I could handle it and follow up shots fast.
Since I probably can't I am sticking with other ones I can handle while still having power.

[sohryu76]

See there you go again, you twist things around.

We are not talking about bullets hitting different places or bullets missing the body completely.

For gods sake... I said when the bullet HITS THE SAME SPOT non vital...
would rather have a .22 or .45acp? Its quit simple not the .22 for damn sure.

Also I asked you a question like this
Question : If a bad guy comes up to you and ask you, would you rather get shot in your leg with a .22 or .45 acp which one would you choose.
You would choose the .22

That question you did not answer because you know damn well that the .22 is poopy compared to a .45acp hitting THE SAME SPOT non vital.

You love to say things like :

If the .22 hits your leg it does more damage than a .45acp that misses!!!!

Well no crap there buddy but we arn't talking about missing the entire body now are we? We are assuming both rounds are hitting the SAME spot non vital.

So since it was soo difficult for you to answer the question you have to say its a bias child question??? How is it bias? Its a simple question that shows facts???

Here let me ask you again if you did not get it, by the way please explain how this question is bias my friend when its just a reality question that proves what would happen in real life.

QUESTION :

A guy breaks into your home. He is going to shoot you in the leg.
A supreme god has came down and gave you the choice.
This god says "Do you want shot in the leg with a .22 or a .45acp?"

Now which one would you choose? I know the answer so I still prove my own point. You know the answer as well.

Also you say a 9mm IS GOOD ENOUGH, but you see I don't want GOOD, I want BETTER!!! I am do not want what is considered adequate, i want more than adequate.

When it comes to stopping a threat you are damn right I am taking every advantage I can get even if it means having 40 more fps, even if it means having .00000000001 bigger bullet, even if it means it does 4% more damage.

I'll take every advantage I can get.

I guess thats what seperates me apart from people like you.

You want what is adequate or good enough to stop a threat.

I want what is better, near best or best for to stop the threat assuming I can handle the round.

Well I tried to open that link but I am downloading stuff so it wouldn't let me open it so I have no clue whats in that link.

I use weird examples to prove a point? No I use real life examples to prove a point.

Let me ask you again. How is this a weird example?
If robber shoots you in your right leg with a .22 then shoots you in your left leg with a .45acp which do you expect to have higher chances of stopping the threat? The .45 acp common sense. How is this a weird example its a real life example that is common sense.

First off I have another thread where people were talking about .22's way more than this thread so I might have gotten the threads mixed up but I do recall someone at the begging of this thread saying .22.

But I can still bring up .22 for a reason.
The reason I can bring up .22 is because people keep saying shot placement.

If shot placement is not equally important as caliber than why am I not allowed to talk about .22 after all you keep saying shot placement!!!
I am agreeing with you saying if you want shot placement then go use a .22 but all you are doing is saying I can't bring up a .22 for an argument???

If your saying its all about shot placement then I can perfectly talk about using a .22 because if you have good shot placement it doesn't matter which gun or caliber you have which is why I am saying why not carry a BB gun since its all about shot placement?

Okay I will not even use .22 as an argument since the shot placement you talk about is no good with a .22 so you use a 9mm's go figure?
Let me ask you this : if its all about shot placement why do you carry a 9mm instead of a .22 or .380? After all that extra power in the 9mm has no use if you have good shot placement right???

I know why you carry a 9mm and not a .380 simply because it delivers more power if you miss vital spots don't sit here and act like its because of shot placement other wise you would be happy with a .25

WHY DON'T I GET A 10mm???

Well if you want to know the 10mm was one of the calibers I was going to get. I was either going to get a .357 Mag, 10mm or .357 Sig.
I decided that a 10mm will have more recoil there for I may be better with the .357 Sig. Yes the 10mm is way better than the Sig and the magnum but I probably won't be able to shoot it as good as the Sig from what I have seen on videos.

It is still in my top three choices.

Shot placement matters only when you hit, being that its proven most rounds on target do not hit vital spots I want a more powerful bullet that I can control.

I would choose a .500 S&W if I could handle it and follow up shots fast.
Since I probably can't I am sticking with other ones I can handle while still having power.

I guess everyone on the forum just has to bow to your wisdom after all your YouTube and Internet searching. Since according to your past post, it sounds like you haven't shot half of these rounds under any circumstances.

[ICEN]

Explain to me what I said was wrong, go back to school maybe you'll learn something.
I get it, your to stupid to actually answer any of my simple questions.

Its okay man, if your brain can't handle basic common sense all you have to do is stop replying to me, if you reply then at least have the decency to answer simple questions, I answer all your easy baby brained questions but you can't even choose over which round you would rather have hit your leg a .22 or a .45acp.
Wait you might complain that I said .22, so I will say 9mm or .44mag to the leg what would you pick let me guess .44mag because you think the opposite of logical thinking.

Replying with answers my friend or don't reply at all.

[Edg]

I can cherry-pick loads with a .32-20 that can shadow all of the standard cartridges that I mentioned prior.75fps probably wouldn't make a difference in the results. Yes, it would have been going faster, thus having more energy and more momentum - but that can be counterproductive when it opens faster and sooner within the target.

The difference between a 125gr bullet going 1375fps and 1450fps is 59FTLB's(basically a .22short's energy). There isn't a badguy in the world that will be able to tell the difference.



You are also faulting in your assumption that every .357Sig load rated at 1450fps will actually do 1450fps in your designated gun. There can be deviations even within the same gun - not to mention different individual guns of the same make & model, and between different manufacturers. The SAAMI spec for the .357Sig is a 125gr bullet at 1350fps with a 15" barrel- see page 2 of 5 from SAAMI's site. Anything over 1350fps is just gravy.

Also, as shown here in some real world tests of velocities, you can see that 1375 is still within the scope of operation for 125gr loads in a 4" barrel(common length for carry guns) - http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/357sig.html

I agree, but to me this image appears to be someone who cherry picked loads that would make the .357 sig look better. Truth is a 135gr 40 is just about as hot as any 125gr .357 sig...but they arent showing those. When I used to carry a p229 .40 I carried 165 ranger T...they are advertised at 1275 fps I am pretty sure. 165 gr in this chart isnt even 1100 fps.
Its all arbitrary to me, I only carry 10mm. I have faith in the gun, the round and my ability to put the rounds into the target at a reasonable pace.