The .357 sig cartridge would give you a different ballistic range. I think it was designed to compete with the .357 mag ballistically, however it does not. The cost of the ammo is atleast 50% more. Unless you want it for something different then I see no benefit to getting that. I went from the .357 sig to the .40 s&w to cut down on cost at the range and the ease of finding ammo.

what are we lookin at here? look the same..i think the black one hides some of the features, but overall the same?

The black one as you can see leaves more of the case unsupported below the web, it's not much more but it is visible.

yeah i c now..jus a lil

Here is the report I promised....

I finally got to get out and shoot some rounds through both. I was very surprised by the results. The parts that look "unsupported" in the pictures are actually below (closer to the rear) where the case is solid. The part of the case that holds the powder and bulges is in the chamber.

As I mentioned before, the glock's chamber is a lot looser then the Lone wolf's chamber. The Glock bulge happens inside the chamber space. There is a very noticeable difference in the brass fired from each.

On my reloads, It would jamb if I dropped the slide with the slide release. It loaded fine if I pulled the slide back and then released it that way. After loading the first round it would run through the rest of the magazine fine. I had noticed a crease in the brass as well that was being made on the top of the feed ramp. I took that edge off and then polished it up along with the rest of the feed ramp. I have not shot it since but with some dummy rounds I made, it is feeding without any problems or creases when using the slide release. The accuracy was good with factory rounds but not a major improvement over the stock barrel. I need to work on my reloads because they didn't shoot as tight as the Federal I shot.

In comparing the two side by side, the Glock chamber is looser all around.