I got a new Sig P 226 and it has interchangable barrels 1 for 40 S&W 1 for 357 Sig. and while the rounds look the same to me there must be an advantage to one or the other. Anyone have any insite as to which is "better"? Any info is greatly appriciated. Thanks, Sean

I have a XD in 357 Sig, and I love it. The 357 Sig, is a 40 S&W necked down to 9mm(.357). It was designed to duplicate the old 357 mag loads. The Federal premium with 125gr slug makes 506 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. While the 40 S&W makes 424 ft-lbs with a 135gr slug.

Also, the rounds should not look the same. The .40 is straight walled, while the 357 sig is a bottle necked cartridge.

.40 S&W



.357 Sig

They are both good rounds. The .357sig was made to duplicate the .357mag 125 grain load. The .40S&W really shines with 165 grain - 180 grain loads. I carry 180 grain golddots in both my .40's.

.357sig can be hard to find ammo forvs. the .40S&W and it is ually a bit more. Wally world carries the value packs of .40S&W for about the same price as a regular box of .357sig (100 rounds vs. 50 rounds)

The .40S&W is more popular since most L.E.O. carry the round which helps in our ammo selection.

Like I already said, they are both good rounds. Buy some ammo and hit the range and see which one you like best. The .357sig usally has more muzzle flip which bothers some people.

I have a .357 Sig barrel for my Glock model 22. I really don't like the sharpness of the recoil impulse compared toa 180 grain .40 S&W load. I also understand from one of the local law enforcement firearms instructors that initial tests with the .357 Sig suggest that officers generally don't shoot as well with the round - more than negating the slight increase in horsepower. Sure looks good on paper, though - and if you can shoot it as well as the .40 it might be a good choice.

No need to ever limit yourself with one gun over another when you can have both for the price of a barrel.

I own both, generally carry the .40 because it's a Glock 27 and is smaller. I feel it would penetrate auto glass better should the need arise. I alternate HydraShoks or Corbon with ball ammo.

I keep the Sig .357 loaded and in my night stand. There is a noticeable difference in the way they shoot and recoil. The .357 has a noticeable crack indicating higher velocity and a little flip. Personally, I like the single-action second shots of the Sig better than the Glock's trigger pull for accuracy. Depending on the situation, this could be an advantage or disadvantage in a fight.

I was one of those that carried a snubbie .357 model 66 for a long time after others went to autos. That round has a lot more data backing up one-stop shots than the .40. But either is a good round.


For a chart showing how the different calibers and loads fare in actual shootings go to http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=0

i had a sig 229 in 40 S&W with a spare 357 sig barrel... it is my understanding that the 357 sig was developed to mimic 357 mag ballistics and that one of the benefits is the ability to penetrate auto glass without stripping it's jacket. FWIW i have no idea, never shot auto glass to see.. but i've read a lot of the development articles on the round... one problem that was and is encountered is setback of the bullet in the magazine under recoil do to the short neck which limits the clamping area on the bullet... it needs a very firm taper crimp to hold the bullet in place...