In /k/s opinion, ¿what are the best guns for shooting the .357 sig?
>>34703320
It's a round developed for a non existent problem.
>>34703519
much like 300blk, 10mm, 6.8, 6.5, .40
>>34703320
SP2022 because you can throw a .40 barrel in it instead for under $200.
>>34703519
You must be thinking of .40 Smith & Wesson, son.
>>34703740
>300blk
Super silent not-Russian 7.62 is great
Seriously though how is this not more popular? It's a massive improvement over 9mm and .40, with manageable recoil, better AP capability and better reliability. Plus out of longer barrels the thing is a monster.
>>34703882
Same reason that 7.62x25 is not popular
>>34703908
Except that 7.62x25 is a shitty cartridge, and .357 Sig isn't.
>>34703882
It's expensive to buy and somewhat more complicated to reload for, while offering lower capacity than straight walled 9mm calibers and lower expanded diameter than its parent caliber.
It's ballistically pretty much identical to 9x23 winchester (which is older) while offering lower capacity and being more prone to bullet setback.
>>34703320
I'd be looking for a P320.
>inb4 "glawk 22"
>>34703519
>t. Limpwrists
>>34704053
Then why the hell isn't 9x23 more popular?
>>34704306
Mainly because it's long enough to require a .45acp frame.
The other aspect is they didn't even attempt to market it as anything other than an IPSC round.
>>34703882
Gee idk. Why aren't 9x23, .38 super, .356TSW, 9mm major, 9mm super cooper etc more popular. Besides price, availability of guns and ammo and the existence or +p/+p+, bonded bullets and the general needs of a service weapon.
When you go searching for defensive round youre looking for something for that hits the 12"-18" mark anyway, so why use something with more blast, mess capacity and more expense
An just for the fuck of it
>>34703320
Queer.
>>34703320
This photo triggers me.
>>34703882
Because we have +p+ 9mm. Which is pretty close in performance but without giving up capacity.
It just doesn't do much other bullets don't do better...it's a great powerful round but it's not significantly more powerful than a +p+ 9mm to justify a new gun and less bullets.
>>34704546
>muh plus p plus
SAAMI doesn't recognize +P+ loadings faggot, nor do weapons manufacturers.
>>34703519
it's for people with nerve damage
>>34705102
The big positive is that bottle-necking decreases chances of feeding and ejection error hugely. It is the excellent cartridge, it's just harder to get people excited over it because it fixes the problems of modern cartridges rather than trying to be a new thing all together. As for it not being that much better than +p+, the payoff is that it won't destroy anything short of a full-sized USP9 shooting it.
>>34705102
>muh wildcat
>>34703519
>non-existent problem
people still need to be shot, anon.
The best gun for the round is still the Sig P229, which is part of the round's problem.
>>34705120
And yet +p and +p+ are made and sold and used all the fucking time.
Not having a pressure spec doesn't mean it isn't real
>>34705707
You don't know wtf wildcat means
>>34706309
Please, run +P+ ammunition all day through your pistol just to be equal to .357 SIG. Go ahead, do it.
I've had an older (no rail) P226 in .357Sig for a long time. No hiccups, fantastic ergonomics. Just a great gun.
>>34706476
What if you just made +P+ .357sig?
Wouldn't you be able to do it with handloads by loading high pressure powder loads?
>>34706476
+p+ is still less than a proof load, which the gun must be able to survive to make it out of the factory. The maintenance schedule will be higher sure, but how many guns do you know of chambered in .357 were ground up built for .357 sig, which is already 5000psi hotter than 9mm? But go ahead and pretend that the ability to use cheap standard pressure 9mm 90% of the time and +p or +p+ as needed.
>Love the fuck out of Sig 357 because of a cyberpunk sci-fi fuck fanboy
>Wanted to get an extended threaded barrel for my Px4 and slap a compensator on it along with a 357 Sig rebarrel
>Lolno cyberanon
>nocando