Mr. Wes,
Howdy again sir. Thanks for posting this one, as I too look forward to seeing what other members will say.
Let me start off by saying I too largely prefer shooting a larger chunk of lead downrange whenever possible. I also hold the .357 magnum in very high regard, as I carried several in my early days in law enforcement. I started off with a model 28, then switched to a model 19. Later on I added a model 19 2.5, a 3" model 65, and a model 66 4". But most of those were added after the fact for me.
Shortly after writing my department's first firearms policy, I replaced my model 19 with a model 57, .41 magnum. My first Chief authorized it for duty use for me, after showing him I was able to qualify effectively with it. I carried it as my primary handgun until Chief number 5 walked throught the door and declared my caliber was an "excessive force law suit" waiting to be filed. He killed my authorized use of the .41 magnum, but oddly did not object when I began carrying a .45acp as its replacement. At the time our issued weapon was a model 65, that he required be loaded with .38 specials, as the first 6 rounds fired. Magnums could be used as reloads, but not as primary carry rounds. He did hold inspections to insure officers were not loaded with .357 magnums.
I guess a part of the "old cop" in me has always been intrigued by pistol rounds that are said to equate to what I have viewed as "trusty, tried and true" revolver calibers. These pistols also offer faster reloads and higher round capacity as well. So to me, I see them as sort of "new and improved" options.
When the 10mm was introduced, I was the "first kid on my block" to buy one. I started with a Colt Delta Elite, and then added a Smith 1006 as my tactical vest gun to supplement the Colt. When my agency killed SA pistols, I began to use the 1006 as my primary pistol. When I tried to find another one to go in my vest, I could not readily locate one, and settled instead for a 4506. They were essentially the same pistol, with the same controls, and I had no problem carrying a .45acp as my vest gun.
When the 40 S&W was introduced, it was reputed to be a shorted piece of 10mm brass, loaded at reduced levels, and capable of being fired in double row mags from a 9mm frame pistol. Many law enforcement agencies began to see it as a better option to the 9mm and began to make the transtition.
I personally had no problem with the 10mm round. So in my "old cop" mind I saw them as basically being: 10mm = .357 mag, and 40 S&W = .38 special, if you follow my logic there.
Eventually I decided bigger was better and bought a Smith 4006, that I quickly replaced with a Sig P226 in 40. Then I added another 226 in 40 as my tactical vest pistol. But to be honest, a part of the "old cop" in me kept saying, why are you basically carrying the .38 special (40 S&W) when you should be using the .357 mag (10mm).
When the 357 Sig was released, and was said to equate ballistically to the .357 mag 125 gr JHP when fired from a 4" barrel revolver, it naturally attracted my attention too. I began to read any articles I could find on it. Most praised what the round had to offer, but some did complain about excessive recoil and muzzle flash. But I kept reading and kept debating it.
I have a couple of friends who work for the US Secret Service. When they told me they had converted to the 357 Sig (hereafter called the Sig), it made a big impression on me. I have always held USSS in high respect as a very professional agency. About the same time, I read that Texas DPS had converted over to the Sig too. Again that made a real impression on me, as I also hold them in high esteem.
In late September 2001, along with a ton of other federal agents from mulitple agencies, I was loaned to the FAA to serve as an Air Marshal, while they recrutied, hired and trained new Air Marshals. Their issued pistol at that point in time was the Sig P228 in 9mm. Those of us on loan simply carried our agency issued handgun with its duty round.
In December 2002, I was re-activated as an Air Marshal, and sent to refresher training, before resuming flight duties. The instructors told us they had recently converted to the Sig P229 in Sig, issuing the Speer 125 gr Gold Dot round. They were very impressed with both the pistol and the round. So another plus for the caliber to me.
After being released to return to my agency, we began to once again allow personally owned pistols with certain illogical restrictions attached. I could carry a P229 in 40 S&W, but not a 226 in the same caliber.
I have a close friend who happens to own "my gun store" too. He is someone else who has "been there and done that" in his earlier days. We both had great respect for each other first, and then formed a natural customer-gun store owner relationship as well. It is a rare weapon I do not purchase from Gary now.
I called him and asked him to order me a Sig 229 in 40 S&W. When it came in I drove to his store to pick it up. He suffers from a very severe case of arthritis now. Most folks who see his hands would naturally assume he can not shot a handgun with them. In reality he remains both an active shooter and an amazing shot.
As my friend, he was aware that some existing medical issues were beginning to worsen over time for me. I had already told him my goal was simply to reach retirement age and bail, rather than staying 2 additional years to increase my retirement payments. Because of my medical issues, I had bascially decided the recoil of the Sig might be a bit much for me now.
While buying the 229, Gary suggested I buy a Sig barrel for it too, telling me he felt the Sig offered him much less felt recoil than the 40 S&W did. I could not stop grinning when someone I trusted said that. I left his store that day with the 229, both barrels, and some Winchester 125 gr TMC and JHP rounds as those were all he had in stock that day.
Our issued 40 S&W round at the time was the Winchester Ranger 165 gr SXT. So that was the round I had to compare the Sig against when shooting both barrels with friends. Much to my pleasant surprise, I felt much less "felt recoil" with the hotter Sig rounds than with the 40 SXT loads. All of my friends who have compared both calibers have agreed they too feel the Sig offers less felt recoil and muzzle climb for them as well.
I do reload which allows me to shoot much more often than if I was having to purchase every round going downrange. Our current issued round for the 40 S&W is the 165gr Gold Dot, and my personal choice for the Sig is the Speer 125 gr Gold Dot. I have never tried any Cor-Bon load of any flavor, but admit you have gotten my interest up a bit in them.
But when practicing now, I will often swap out barrels in my 229, steel framed 226R, and FN HP, to fire both the 40 S&W and the Sig rounds. I do still shoot the 40 well and my groups for now remain tight with it. But honestly, when using the Sig rounds, my groups are both a bit tighter, and can be fired at a slightly faster pace too. Both of those are advantages to me on a personal level.
I have also noted that I can fire 2 or 3 times the number of Sig loads than I can a 40 before my body starts to say - ok you are just wasting ammo now, stop shooting. As I fully believe anyone who chooses to carry a weapon either for self-defense or duty use, should shoot it both well and often, I naturally lean towards the Sig now over the 40.
So admittedly the largest part of my preference for the Sig over the 40 is simply personal. I feel I shoot it better so it is the more logical choice for me. But the bottom line, isn't that really how and why most of us select both our handgun, caliber and loads. We choose what we feel works best for us.
I readily accept my next comment will clearly fall out of "scientific" terms. But please recall the caliber comparisons I made earlier. As I said I have no exposure to the Cor-bon loads, but I have always sort of seen them as "exotic" loads, if you follow me now. I just don't normally include them into what I would normally mean when I use the phrase "most commercial loadings" in discussing ammo in general. So for purpsoses of this non-scientific comment, please allow me to exlude the Cor-Bon and others of its type in consideration.
Another part of the reason I like the Sig over the 40 is more along the lines of what I call a "gut reaction". The "old cop" in me keeps whispering - which would you rather carry to protect yourself with - the .357 mag (357 Sig) or the .38 special (40 S&W). The "old cop" side of me has been doing a fair job of looking out for me over the years. So it is hard for me to ignore him when he whispers to me now.
Mr. Wes, these are just my personal thoughts, but they work well for me. But again sir, I thank you for posting this question. I really do look forward to seeing what other members have to say in response.
twoguns
Howdy again sir. Thanks for posting this one, as I too look forward to seeing what other members will say.
Let me start off by saying I too largely prefer shooting a larger chunk of lead downrange whenever possible. I also hold the .357 magnum in very high regard, as I carried several in my early days in law enforcement. I started off with a model 28, then switched to a model 19. Later on I added a model 19 2.5, a 3" model 65, and a model 66 4". But most of those were added after the fact for me.
Shortly after writing my department's first firearms policy, I replaced my model 19 with a model 57, .41 magnum. My first Chief authorized it for duty use for me, after showing him I was able to qualify effectively with it. I carried it as my primary handgun until Chief number 5 walked throught the door and declared my caliber was an "excessive force law suit" waiting to be filed. He killed my authorized use of the .41 magnum, but oddly did not object when I began carrying a .45acp as its replacement. At the time our issued weapon was a model 65, that he required be loaded with .38 specials, as the first 6 rounds fired. Magnums could be used as reloads, but not as primary carry rounds. He did hold inspections to insure officers were not loaded with .357 magnums.
I guess a part of the "old cop" in me has always been intrigued by pistol rounds that are said to equate to what I have viewed as "trusty, tried and true" revolver calibers. These pistols also offer faster reloads and higher round capacity as well. So to me, I see them as sort of "new and improved" options.
When the 10mm was introduced, I was the "first kid on my block" to buy one. I started with a Colt Delta Elite, and then added a Smith 1006 as my tactical vest gun to supplement the Colt. When my agency killed SA pistols, I began to use the 1006 as my primary pistol. When I tried to find another one to go in my vest, I could not readily locate one, and settled instead for a 4506. They were essentially the same pistol, with the same controls, and I had no problem carrying a .45acp as my vest gun.
When the 40 S&W was introduced, it was reputed to be a shorted piece of 10mm brass, loaded at reduced levels, and capable of being fired in double row mags from a 9mm frame pistol. Many law enforcement agencies began to see it as a better option to the 9mm and began to make the transtition.
I personally had no problem with the 10mm round. So in my "old cop" mind I saw them as basically being: 10mm = .357 mag, and 40 S&W = .38 special, if you follow my logic there.
Eventually I decided bigger was better and bought a Smith 4006, that I quickly replaced with a Sig P226 in 40. Then I added another 226 in 40 as my tactical vest pistol. But to be honest, a part of the "old cop" in me kept saying, why are you basically carrying the .38 special (40 S&W) when you should be using the .357 mag (10mm).
When the 357 Sig was released, and was said to equate ballistically to the .357 mag 125 gr JHP when fired from a 4" barrel revolver, it naturally attracted my attention too. I began to read any articles I could find on it. Most praised what the round had to offer, but some did complain about excessive recoil and muzzle flash. But I kept reading and kept debating it.
I have a couple of friends who work for the US Secret Service. When they told me they had converted to the 357 Sig (hereafter called the Sig), it made a big impression on me. I have always held USSS in high respect as a very professional agency. About the same time, I read that Texas DPS had converted over to the Sig too. Again that made a real impression on me, as I also hold them in high esteem.
In late September 2001, along with a ton of other federal agents from mulitple agencies, I was loaned to the FAA to serve as an Air Marshal, while they recrutied, hired and trained new Air Marshals. Their issued pistol at that point in time was the Sig P228 in 9mm. Those of us on loan simply carried our agency issued handgun with its duty round.
In December 2002, I was re-activated as an Air Marshal, and sent to refresher training, before resuming flight duties. The instructors told us they had recently converted to the Sig P229 in Sig, issuing the Speer 125 gr Gold Dot round. They were very impressed with both the pistol and the round. So another plus for the caliber to me.
After being released to return to my agency, we began to once again allow personally owned pistols with certain illogical restrictions attached. I could carry a P229 in 40 S&W, but not a 226 in the same caliber.
I have a close friend who happens to own "my gun store" too. He is someone else who has "been there and done that" in his earlier days. We both had great respect for each other first, and then formed a natural customer-gun store owner relationship as well. It is a rare weapon I do not purchase from Gary now.
I called him and asked him to order me a Sig 229 in 40 S&W. When it came in I drove to his store to pick it up. He suffers from a very severe case of arthritis now. Most folks who see his hands would naturally assume he can not shot a handgun with them. In reality he remains both an active shooter and an amazing shot.
As my friend, he was aware that some existing medical issues were beginning to worsen over time for me. I had already told him my goal was simply to reach retirement age and bail, rather than staying 2 additional years to increase my retirement payments. Because of my medical issues, I had bascially decided the recoil of the Sig might be a bit much for me now.
While buying the 229, Gary suggested I buy a Sig barrel for it too, telling me he felt the Sig offered him much less felt recoil than the 40 S&W did. I could not stop grinning when someone I trusted said that. I left his store that day with the 229, both barrels, and some Winchester 125 gr TMC and JHP rounds as those were all he had in stock that day.
Our issued 40 S&W round at the time was the Winchester Ranger 165 gr SXT. So that was the round I had to compare the Sig against when shooting both barrels with friends. Much to my pleasant surprise, I felt much less "felt recoil" with the hotter Sig rounds than with the 40 SXT loads. All of my friends who have compared both calibers have agreed they too feel the Sig offers less felt recoil and muzzle climb for them as well.
I do reload which allows me to shoot much more often than if I was having to purchase every round going downrange. Our current issued round for the 40 S&W is the 165gr Gold Dot, and my personal choice for the Sig is the Speer 125 gr Gold Dot. I have never tried any Cor-Bon load of any flavor, but admit you have gotten my interest up a bit in them.
But when practicing now, I will often swap out barrels in my 229, steel framed 226R, and FN HP, to fire both the 40 S&W and the Sig rounds. I do still shoot the 40 well and my groups for now remain tight with it. But honestly, when using the Sig rounds, my groups are both a bit tighter, and can be fired at a slightly faster pace too. Both of those are advantages to me on a personal level.
I have also noted that I can fire 2 or 3 times the number of Sig loads than I can a 40 before my body starts to say - ok you are just wasting ammo now, stop shooting. As I fully believe anyone who chooses to carry a weapon either for self-defense or duty use, should shoot it both well and often, I naturally lean towards the Sig now over the 40.
So admittedly the largest part of my preference for the Sig over the 40 is simply personal. I feel I shoot it better so it is the more logical choice for me. But the bottom line, isn't that really how and why most of us select both our handgun, caliber and loads. We choose what we feel works best for us.
I readily accept my next comment will clearly fall out of "scientific" terms. But please recall the caliber comparisons I made earlier. As I said I have no exposure to the Cor-bon loads, but I have always sort of seen them as "exotic" loads, if you follow me now. I just don't normally include them into what I would normally mean when I use the phrase "most commercial loadings" in discussing ammo in general. So for purpsoses of this non-scientific comment, please allow me to exlude the Cor-Bon and others of its type in consideration.
Another part of the reason I like the Sig over the 40 is more along the lines of what I call a "gut reaction". The "old cop" in me keeps whispering - which would you rather carry to protect yourself with - the .357 mag (357 Sig) or the .38 special (40 S&W). The "old cop" side of me has been doing a fair job of looking out for me over the years. So it is hard for me to ignore him when he whispers to me now.
Mr. Wes, these are just my personal thoughts, but they work well for me. But again sir, I thank you for posting this question. I really do look forward to seeing what other members have to say in response.
twoguns
