..357 Sig

[Dr. Courtney]

If your applications and risk assessments are those typical of a CHL holder, there is little advantage.

But if you've got any longer range applications or risk assessments, the .357 Sig is both more accurate AND the energy advantage grows at ranges past 25 yards.

There are also the odd corners of risk assessments. I think the .357 Sig has the advantage of penetrating the skull on a rogue bovine (I raise cattle).

On the other hand, the .40 has subsonic loads available if you need to do any supressed work. It is also possible to load snake shot in the .40 S&W, whereas I think is just about impossible to load snake shot in a .357 Sig.

But on the whole, there's not going to be a lot of difference between the .357 Sig and the .40 for the average CHL holder.

Michael Courtney

[DonGlock26]

Both rounds will do what defensive handgun ammunition needs to do. .357Sig is felt to have less muzzle flip and better accuracy than .40 by many .357Sig users, including myself.

.357 Sig has a better chance of defeating cover. Many gunfights occur in parking lots, near automobiles. Being able to defeat an opponent's cover is a plus.

It has been in use with several LE agencies for 10 years with no complaints that I have heard of. Actually, it's quite the opposite.

I actually didn't care for .357Sig, until I bought a P229 with both barrels(.357/.40). I found that I prefered the .357Sig's results on the targets.

[SIGShooter]

My first Glock was a 23. My first SIG was a P239 in 40 S&W. I couldn't warm up to the 40. I got my next gun which was a P229 in .357 SIG. There it was. The caliber that I have been searching for. Fast, accurate, hard hitting, controllable, reliable, tight groups, confident to use it. I now only own Glocks. All in .357 SIG. All great guns. I'm not saying I dislike any of the other calibers, I think this one fits me and serves my needs. It's all about what YOU like and what YOU can handle.



On another note the next gun will be the G36.
Then the family of 9MM.

[thejackbull45]

Originally posted by Dr. Courtney
If your applications and risk assessments are those typical of a CHL holder, there is little advantage.



Statistically a CHL holder will never need a gun so why carry at all?

[SIGShooter]

But on the whole, there's not going to be a lot of difference between the .357 Sig and the .40 for the average CHL holder.


What classifies us (CHL holders) as average? And if there isn't a lot of difference for the "average" CHL holder than is there a difference for the "average" LEO or Federal Agent?

[DrD]

I'm very lucky to have Glocks chambered in 9mm, 357 SIG, and 40 S&W plus enough land to have my own 100yd. range and hands down I shoot better and it just "feels better" with the .357 SIG. Personal preferance...Yes. but I think it's the "hot set-up", Dan

[SIGShooter]

it just "feels better" with the .357 SIG.




You dirty man!!!


;z

[SDGlock23]

I really like the 357 SIG, it gives another great option to those who carry a .40. It's impossible to say it's a better performer because there are simply too many variables. If you prefer it, thats fine.

Originally posted by Dr. Courtney
...the .357 Sig is both more accurate AND the energy advantage grows at ranges past 25 yards.

There are also the odd corners of risk assessments. I think the .357 Sig has the advantage of penetrating the skull on a rogue bovine (I raise cattle).

Lighter/faster bullets have a distict DISADVANTAGE as range grows. Heavier bullets retain their momentum much better than lighter ones. Änd of course if it's penetration your after, just stick with FMJ's.

[SIGShooter]

What classifies us (CHL holders) as average? And if there isn't a lot of difference for the "average" CHL holder than is there a difference for the "average" LEO or Federal Agent?



So again I'll ask... Is the performance of the chosen caliber/amunition just not going to work because I am an "average" CHL holder? And will the same caliber/ammunition combination work better for a LEO or Federal agent because they are just that? I'm not understanding the point to the original post. The doc basically says that not matter what caliber/ammunition setup you choose it isn't going to matter. You're just a CHL holder. That's what that says to me. I don't go out and take pot shots at "rogue bovine" nor do I own a silencer. So what is the point of the original Post?

Lighter/faster bullets have a distict DISADVANTAGE as range grows. Heavier bullets retain their momentum much better than lighter ones. Änd of course if it's penetration your after, just stick with FMJ's.


If you are carrying for SD and you are taking long range shots you are definitely wrong.If you are doing it for competition than that's understandable. With all of the research I have done nothing has said to me that a BG is going to accost me at 50 yards. If it's going to happen it's going to be within bad breath distance.