357 Sig is stupid... what about 10mm?

I've been considering getting one for a while. Maybe second kind of cool. Really it makes no sense, why buy another $500+ handgun... better to just get a few boxes of some some performance ammo like 9mm Underwood, right?

 

I wouldn’t say it’s stupid to consider it. Unless you have very disposable income such as @Bcamos, I’d stick with a platform that I’m already heavily invested in. Also, I’m of the thinking that I have ZERO ammo for a weapon unless I have a case of ammo for said weapon so it would cost me quite a bit to get a new caliber.. kinda like when I bought a .44mag and now I have maybe a box and a half for it because it’s so expensive lol

 

Your mom has disposable income...

 

Why not just get a .357 mag?

Or, if you already have a .357 mag, why not get a second, or third one?

I know...

 

So does your wife’s

 

True statement

 

I had a 357sig pistol a few years ago. Ammo was impossible to find locally. When I did find it, it was expensive. 2-3x’s 9mm cost.
I sold that firearm and consolidated all handguns to basic calibers: 9mm for semi; 38/357 for revolver, and of course, .22.

The ammo craze made me do it.

 

This round has always intrigued me, as it is like a 9MM on steroids. I reload, but have heard the bottle neck cartridge can be difficult, so never gave it much thought. I make some hotter 9MM's that perform well, so pretty much stick with that as well as other pistol, and rifle cartridges.

 

In theory it has some advantages in feed reliability, being a bottleneck cartridge, also any handguns chambered for it should be able to handle the pressures of hot loads.
9mm+p can indeed equal most loading of .357 Sig, but you need to be slightly more thoughtful about what you are running hot loads in with 9mm.

For what it’s worth, Maine Game Wardens have been issued .357 Sig for a number of years, main factor being that the typical loading available is theoretically more effective on large animals they may have to put down after automobile collisions, etc.
That said, all the Wardens I know use a shotgun or a AR type carbine to dispatch wildlife when necessary, so I don’t think the reality holds up as much as the theory.

PS: If I wanted a high powered semi, I’d personally skip the .357 in favor of a 10mm, just my $0.02

 

I've considered it in the past, but like others pointed out the availability of ammo held me off from it. It makes a little more since if you own a pistol in .40sw that conversion barrels are available for(Glock,SW M&P,XD) that way you have a common round as your base for the gun and your only spending $100-150 for a Lonewolf or Stormlake .357sig barrel to play around with.

 

Not a fan of the cartridge, nor a .40 for that matter.

 

Just out of curiosity what reasons do you dislike the .40 for? I'd truly appreciate the feedback from someone like you who's had a long career as an instructor. The main reason I'd like to know is I've recently taken and passed our state police cadet entrance exam and will hopefully get into an academy this year. The state police here give the choice of issue pistol being Glock G17, G22 or G21. I had been thinking I'd go with a G22 since .40 is what I've had the most trigger time on, but if there's more advantages to either the 9mm or 45acp option I'd love to know.

My only defense pistol experience has been with .45acp, .40sw and 10mm, and .38/.357 revolvers. I bought a .40 as my first pistol because it was what the local sheriffs office and PD were issuing officers at the time and I had the chance to shoot some of their Glocks as an older teen at the range I practiced at for rifle comps.

@Zeek sorry to derail from the original topic.

 

Good stuff man... I'm listening.

 

I never taught the .357 sig, but from 1996 til 2016 I watched thousands of trainees struggle with the .40. When that caliber was adopted, the qual had to be reduced from 50 to 25 yards. Most people in law enforcement are not gun enthusiasts. The argument one hears from fans is "you have to train more". Train all you want. You will still be faster and more accurate with a 9mm, and it is more fun to shoot which encourages weak shooters more. The .357 sig has a sharper recoil.

Pistol bullets have improved.

I have 6 1911s, I shoot my CZ75 more and carry my sig 938 the majority of the time these days and would not feel undergunned at all using it to defend myself. Besides, Bulk 9mm is cheaper.
John Browning was right.

 

The .40 Short & Weak has an abrupt slide speed that just isn’t user friendly. While I didn’t train as many people as KMCMICHAEL, I did watch several hundred students over the years not enjoying themselves while shooting the .40 and 99% of them couldn’t explain what was the problem. The .357 SIG shares that recoil speed but adds a truly obnoxious muzzle blast. I conducted a carbine class for one agency that issued the .357SIG and during transition practice their pistols seemed louder than their M4 rifles. We moved to .45acp from .40 and scores improved.

As an added “benefit” the .357SIG only has about 1 mm of neck gripping the bullet which seems like a recipe for bullet setback if chambered more than a few times. One co-worker had previously worked for the US Secret Service and he said that they shoot up their carry ammo monthly.

Just say “no”.

 

Well... that's cool.

 

Thanks for that info!

 

Ahh... but full house 10mm, that's another story.

 

My G20 will be the last pistol I'll ever part with! The weight of that hefty slide and the polymer frame seem to go well with the warmer loadings I've tried so far. And the carnage it does hogs had definitely made .40 look short & weak by comparison.