.40 S&W or .357 SIG?

[Eugene V. Debs]

Please state your preference and why.

[27hand]

Please state your preference and why.

I shot my Glock 32 for a year and a half or so as a .357 sig. Gun shot fine. Ammo was more expensive than .40.

I bought a .40 bbl for it and it stays in that configuration right now. I guess ammo cost is the primary reason. Bullet perfomance doesn't seem to be that much of a difference.

Shot placement is the key.

9mm, 45auto, .40S&W, .357 sig all have people who will rave that one is so much better for a variety of reasons but it all really comes down to shot placement. This is my opinion.

I put the .357 sig barrel back on occasionally. It barks pretty good and has a bit more recoil than .40 but generally they are pretty close.

Some guns have interchangable bbls as Glock does so you can try both and make your own decision.


27hand

[God's Country]

I agree with shot placement, and what works for you. When I was considering the .357 Sig I went with the .40 cal mainly because of ammo cost.

[Pa. Patriot]

.40

ammo cost, variety and availability.

[XD45]

.40

ammo cost, variety and availability.

40 for the reasons he said..


For a self defense situation your not going to see any difference....

[Suburban]

As far as effectiveness, there's not much difference.

Factory ammo is more expensive in .357SIG. If you reload, you can use cheaper bullets and neck down .40 brass, so it's actually cheaper to load .357SIG than it is to load .40, it just takes an extra step and another die.

[Hokkmike]

The .40 S & W is more or less ubiquitous, the .357 SIG is not.

[Siggy]

.40

ammo cost, variety and availability.

ditto. The .40 shoots nice and is readily available for less money.

[DaveM55]

.40

ammo cost, variety and availability.

+1 What he said cost, variety and availability.

[rey]

40S&W Where I do most of my shopping you can't find 357Sig.