If cost is no object - .357SIG opinions

This is where you can talk about all equipment issues; firearms, ammunition, magazines, care & repair, holsters, gun cases, etc.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

User avatar
BuckJM53
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: If cost is no object - .357SIG opinions

Post by BuckJM53 »

Morne wrote:Buck,

Sorry if my post came across as argumentative, needed coffee still when I posted it. 8) ........ Long gone are the classic days of, "Choose between a single-stack 1911 .45 or a Browning Hi-Power double-stack 9mm." I'm certain we're both glad for it.
Morne ... I didn't take your comments as argumentative at all :D. I thought that your question and comments were well reasoned and I was just clarifying where I personally choose to "draw the line". While I agree that the days of minimal choice in carry guns is long gone (many great options available today), and while I have carried several polymer pistols since 2004, my preferred carry rotation today still includes a single stack 1911 (Springfield micro-compact) and a Hi-Power along with an alloy framed CZ 2075 RAMI. They conceal well, I practice with them weekly and I am very confident in my ability with them. While I am admittedly a bit of a dinosaur, I believe in my heart of hearts that well placed shots with either 147 gr Ranger T or 230 gr Ranger T will get the job done if "the day" ever comes :).
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the democrats believe every day is April 15" - Ronald Reagan
User avatar
Morne
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 10631
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: Wayne County

Re: If cost is no object - .357SIG opinions

Post by Morne »

While I am admittedly a bit of a dinosaur...
Brocephus, you're talking to a man who carries REVOLVERS...I'm right with you in the pre-KT impact crowd... :lol:
Mr. Glock wrote:Personally, if I'm carrying a small gun where going from 8 rounds in a 9mm would drop to 5 in 45, I'm going with the 9. The difference between 13 rounds of 357Sig and 15 rounds of 9? I'm going with the stronger round because the percentage difference in capacity is small. But I know I shoot both equally well in that larger gun, and it works for me because the best handgun/caliber combination is the one you believe it.
Breaking it down into percentage differences is a good analytical tool. So sure, a 38% debit is big but a 13% debit is small. Somewhere between those numbers is the line you draw.

One could also try to put a percentage bonus on the .357SIG versus the 9x19mm due to performance. But to what number? Velocity? Kinetic energy? Taylor KO? Inches of gel penetration after some barrier? See, this is where things get tough because we KNOW the .357SIG is a better round but it is very hard to OBJECTIVELY quantify that.

If we could prove that the .357SIG is at least 13% better than 9x19mm then the 13% capacity debit becomes very rational.
Thus spoke Zarathustra.

Footsoldier in the Conservative Insurrection of the GOP.

Remember, only you can prevent big government!
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: If cost is no object - .357SIG opinions

Post by Mr. Glock »

Plus, there is a minimum hurdle rate. I prefer a higher capacity gun than a J-frame, say, and want at least 10 rounds on my person. With smaller guns, this means an extra magazine. Based on historical events, you might run out of ammo with a five shot gun X times, but this becomes less Y times with 7 shots. So, not just the absolute difference, but rather the historical shots fired factor.

And historical shots fired may be subject to change with today's advent of RoP active shooters. The possible need for long distance head shots (to avoid setting of a bomb vest) and multiple targets does tilt the equation to the 9mm extra capacity and lower recoil.
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
User avatar
BuckJM53
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: If cost is no object - .357SIG opinions

Post by BuckJM53 »

Morne wrote:
While I am admittedly a bit of a dinosaur...
Brocephus, you're talking to a man who carries REVOLVERS...I'm right with you in the pre-KT impact crowd... :lol:
Morne ... I stand corrected :D. Do you still rub sticks together to start a fire or have you graduated to matches ? :lol:


Morne wrote:One could also try to put a percentage bonus on the .357SIG versus the 9x19mm due to performance. But to what number? Velocity? Kinetic energy? Taylor KO? Inches of gel penetration after some barrier? See, this is where things get tough because we KNOW the .357SIG is a better round but it is very hard to OBJECTIVELY quantify that..........
My point exactly from my earlier post. Considering all of the possibilities and factors that influence the mythical "best" option just makes my head hurt :?. Must hang on to K.I.S.S. principle :lol:
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the democrats believe every day is April 15" - Ronald Reagan
Post Reply