Why doesn't Ruger offer a .357Sig version?

[craigcpa]

Greetings all. I've recently held the SR9c and really liked it. If not for all the 9mm pistols I already own, it'd definitely already be in my stable. Even so, it'd be there faster if it were to be offered in .357Sig. I've just recently shot this round (Sig 229) and really, really like it. I'm getting rid of my >40S&W's and sticking with 9mm, but would gladly choose a .357Sig. So why doesn't Ruger offer the SR9(357)c or any pistol in this caliber?

Thanks for your reply.

 

[FergusonTO35]

Lack of demand, probably. Pistols in this caliber don't set sales records, even from Glock and Sig.

 

[toysoldier]

Lack of demand, probably. Pistols in this caliber don't set sales records, even from Glock and Sig.

Gotta wonder why that is. Some folks who have looked at Emergency Room statistics call the .357 magnum the #1 manstopper. The .357 SIG duplicates some of those loads, and its bottleneck design helps ensure absolutely reliable function, in high-capacity designs. A few agencies have adopted it---I think the Texas Rangers, and maybe the Border Patrol. If I were a LEO and had the option of choosing my own weapon, I'd give the .357 SIG serious consideration.

What I'd really like is a Luger-ish pistol in .357 SIG .

 

[revhigh]

Cause it's a stupid caliber answering a question that was never asked ??

REV

 

[WAYNO]

Cause it's a stupid caliber answering a question that was never asked ??

REV

Not entirely true. I've asked the question. Looking at the ballistics, alone, I question why the cartridge is not more popular.

A whole lot more oomph than a 9x19, in a cartridge that will chamber like dropping a marble into a funnel.

So, for the folks that have experience with this round, I would like to know why we shouldn't see more guns chambered in the .357 Sig round.

WAYNO.

 

[revhigh]

I would like to know why we shouldn't see more guns chambered in the .357 Sig round.

WAYNO.

Cause it's a stupid caliber answering a question that was never asked ??

LOL !!

REV

 

[wixedmords]

Looking at the ballistics, alone, I question why the cartridge is not more popular.

A whole lot more oomph than a 9x19, in a cartridge that will chamber like dropping a marble into a funnel.

So, for the folks that have experience with this round, I would like to know why we shouldn't see more guns chambered in the .357 Sig round.

WAYNO.

Those ballistics are tempting, for sure Wayno. I want as close to 357 Mag performance myself. I also of heard over and over that the round does drop right in the chamber like there was a funnel guiding it. So, I am right there with you in the thought process.

My only hangup is a necked handgun cartridge, because I never think of myself buying ammo, always take reloading the cartridge for granted. Not that a necked cartridge is hard to reload, it is really that a straight-walled handgun cartridge is so easy to work with. The whole issue may be mute as loading for the 357 Sig may be easy. I mean, there isn't much case sliding into a die, but it does headspace on the shoulder. Having to set back the shoulder is an added task that usually doesn't fall upon handgun cartridges. I guess I am thinking there will be more case work and that keeps me away. That and I try to stick to a rule of mine of not adding new calibers after it getting out of hand years ago.

 

[Lateck]

The 357SIG is based on the .40S&W so, now that Ruger has introduced the SR40 maybe they might come out with a .357.

I personally think that would be nice, I don't care what others think.

Lateck,

 

[jhearne]

I think the .357 Sig is a nice round, many Law Enforcement departments use them, I can think of at least one locally that does so. Ruger's been pretty slow going on the new caliber front and we just saw them bring out a .40 S&W SR. The original SR9 was released in October of 2007, 3 years to develop and release a compact version in 9mm and a full size in .40.

I doubt you'll see a .357 Sig before we see a .45 ACP and probably before we see compact versions of these calibers. Still, it'd be nice to have the options for those who want it.

Now, if they bring out a .357 Sig, what do you think the odds are of a 10mm SR?

Josh

 

[craigcpa]

I think the .357 Sig is a nice round, many Law Enforcement departments use them, I can think of at least one locally that does so. Ruger's been pretty slow going on the new caliber front and we just saw them bring out a .40 S&W SR. The original SR9 was released in October of 2007, 3 years to develop and release a compact version in 9mm and a full size in .40.

I doubt you'll see a .357 Sig before we see a .45 ACP and probably before we see compact versions of these calibers. Still, it'd be nice to have the options for those who want it.

Now, if they bring out a .357 Sig, what do you think the odds are of a 10mm SR?

Josh

I know of several agencies choosing the caliber - NCSHP, Texas DPS, USSS, Federal Air Marshals - but that is not why I'm interested. I finally switched my Sig 229 from >40 to >357 Sig and instantly knew the round was for me. Flat, flat trajectory that *ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS I DIDN"T ASK! :lol:

I asked the question because Ruger is introducing the SR in .40S&W and a simple barrel switch is all that is needed in my Sig and G23 to go to .357Sig. So why wouldn't Ruger simply fabricate a different barrel for the .357Sig round?

 

[jhearne]

They might, unfortunately, Ruger has never contacted me with some non-disclosure forms to sign about any new products so I really have no idea why not. I do know that going to .357 from .40 is really easy and the only thing I can think of is reliability of the gun without changing/beefing up anything else. Honestly though, I don't see why not, the SR40 seems really solid and should handle the caliber.

Josh

 

[revhigh]

Flat, flat trajectory that *ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS I DIDN"T ASK! :lol:

Looking at the ballistics, alone, I question why the cartridge is not more popular.

How FLAT does the trajectory need to be in an automatic pistol round ? I'd venture to say that ALL pistol rounds have a flat trajectory within the distances that an automatic pistol is used.

The 357 SIG is pretty much a one bullet caliber, and that's a 125-grain bullet at about 1350 fps. That falls anywhere from a 100 to 250 fps slower than comparable bullet weight in the .357 Magnum. The 125-grain bullet is about the lightest bullet for the .357 Magnum. The 357 Mag easily handles 145, 158, 165 and 180 grain bullets. In fact, you purchase factory 158-grain .357 Magnum ammo hotter (more MV/ME) than the 125-grain loads for the 357 SIG. Comparing the 357 SIG to .357 Magnum is just creative marketing.

Also, considering .357 Sig as a carry gun, how does it compare to a 9 mm, 40, or .45? The 357 SIG delivers 9x19 performance/effectiveness--nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in some loadings the 9x19 outperforms the 357 SIG in penetration and expansion--what REALLY counts.

357Sig doesn't do much that a 9mm or .40 won't. It's a bit faster than 9mm and .40. It penetrates hard targets a bit better and has (a little) more energy. 10mm does all of this and does it better. 10mm is balistically better than .357 Magnum as well, and there are no bottle-neck reloading issues to contend with.

Testing conducted by the FBI (Buford Boone) and that done by Dr. Gary Roberts clearly show no meaningful differences between the 9x19 and 357 SIG. The 147-grain Ranger T (RA9T) penetrates 14.5" and expands to 0.66" inches while the 125-grain Ranger T (RA357SIGT) does 12.1" and 0.66"--in other words, the 9x19 gives 2.5" more penetration and the same expansion. The figures stay close pretty much across the battery of tests (including auto glass) with the 9x19 having a slightly better figures across the board.

It does not matter if you use a 9mm in 115gr 124,125, 127,147 9mm or the ever touted "more powerful" 155, 165, 180 .40 S&W jhp as long as the bullet is working properly they are going to be within a few millimeters of each other in wound channel diameter and +or - and inch or two in depth.

9mm +p 125, .357 Sig 125, .357 Magnum 125, 9x23mm 125 are basically all the same there is no significant difference between them.

If you stick to 124/125/127-grain bullets from the major manufacturers, the 357 SIG falls right in the middle--it has about 100 fps on the 9x19, and it falls about 100 fps short when it comes to .357 Magnum. In terms of actual bullet performance/effectiveness, there's not enough difference to make a difference. If you like heavier bullets it's no contest--the .357 Magnum can push a 158/-grain JHP faster than the 357 SIG can push a 125-grain JHP.

The 357 SIG is a good round, but that's it--nothing more and nothing less. If you like it, fine, but it's no magic bullet. It offers the same level of performance and effectiveness as any of the current generation service calibers. It's just another choice.

Try to find 357 Sig ammo at your local Walmart or even your local sporting goods store, not saying you can't, but you won't like the price or the selection.

If you want a HOT, ballistically superior auto round ... look at 10MM ... a FAR more mainstream caliber .... and even 10MM is tough to find.

REV

 

[GR8_Outdoorsman]

I carry a Sig P239 .40 and have often considered ordering the .357 Sig barrel and magazines to try out. I always talk myself out of it because I love how the gun shoots and handles.

What benefits/improvements could I expect if I converted it to .357 Sig?

 

[revhigh]

I carry a Sig P239 .40 and have often considered ordering the .357 Sig barrel and magazines to try out. I always talk myself out of it because I love how the gun shoots and handles.

What benefits/improvements could I expect if I converted it to .357 Sig?

Much greater expense, a lack of easily available and cheap plinking/range ammunition, and much more difficult reloading ?

To say nothing of the expense of the barrel and mags ....

REV

 

[GR8_Outdoorsman]

Haha.... Thanks for convincing me, once again, that I don't need to do it!!!

 

[revhigh]

Haha.... Thanks for convincing me, once again, that I don't need to do it!!!

Your Sig is just fine as it is ... the 239's are spectacular guns ! I have a 226 and a 225 in 9MM, and they are the most accurate 9MM's I own.

REV

 

[craigcpa]

I carry a Sig P239 .40 and have often considered ordering the .357 Sig barrel and magazines to try out. I always talk myself out of it because I love how the gun shoots and handles.

What benefits/improvements could I expect if I converted it to .357 Sig?

Much greater expense, a lack of easily available and cheap plinking/range ammunition, and much more difficult reloading ?

To say nothing of the expense of the barrel and mags ....

REV

Your previous post was quite informative, and I do not disagree. And as you stated it is a personal "my" choice. As for the bottleneck design, I've read many other statements that the design is intuitively more reliable. Although I can't recall any failures of any kind in my shooting of 9mm, .40S&W or my limited .357Sig, in my simplistic mind, I can see how the bottleneck "ramps up" into the barrel would be, or is, a better design for reliability.

Regardless, what I can say definitively, is that no caliber I've shot has left a smile on my face as has .357Sig. And I'd really like to shoot it out of a SR "c" model.

 

[revhigh]

no caliber I've shot has left a smile on my face as has .357Sig.

I take it you like HOT auto rounds (don't we ALL) ? You wanna REALLY SMILE ????

10MM is the answer !!!

Trust me ....

REV


PS .... ALL properly loaded straight wall pistol cartridges feed just fine, as you've discovered .... they have for decades, and literally BILLIONS of rounds .... bottleneck pistol cartridges, as much as they would seem to offer an 'advantage' because you're 'dropping a marble into a funnel' ... LOL .... solves a 'problem' that simply doesn't exist.