What are your thoughts on the subcompact glock chambered in .357 sig? Thoughts and opinions appreciated on pistol and cartridge.
Thanks!
Joeyshoe
Printable View
What are your thoughts on the subcompact glock chambered in .357 sig? Thoughts and opinions appreciated on pistol and cartridge.
Thanks!
Joeyshoe
I loved mine. . . 357 sig is expensive to shoot, so I suggest finding a .40 barrel (I picked mine up on Glocktalk for $50) for range shooting.
I like the ballistics of the 357 sig, and like the size /weight of the G26, 27, 33.
I sold mine when I moved, but am looking for another
The 26/27/33 platform is THE best CCW piece in my humble opinion. I've never shot the 33, only the 26 and 27. In my opinion the 27 wasn't nearly as pleasant to shoot as the 26 (obviously). You may want to see about trying one out before you buy, to see if you mind the recoil. Also as already stated, ammo is costly, and was the deciding factor in me trading my 32 for a 19. I can almost buy a thousand rounds of 9mm for the cost of five hundred rounds of 357 sig.
Also this may have been best suited for the Polymer pistols section. [Beer]
The G33 is a great little pistol, but as said, it can be pricey to shoot. In addition to the .40 barrel swap, you can get a 9mm conversion barrel.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT
I am going to jump in here. I have a 27, love it. I would actually prefer the 26 for a number of reasons including recoil and cost of ammo. It is definitely one of the best concealable guns out there. I like a lot of other guns a lot, and Glock isn't my favorite all around gun, however I just don't think you can beat it for concealing and being still a quality gun.
Now I am going to ask a question here...All you have to do is change the barrel out and you can shoot 9mm/.40/.357 sig? I was under the impression that the entire slide had to be changed?
Yes, all you have to do is change the barrel out. With the Exception of the Barrel and the mags, everything between the 357 and 40 are identical, the 9mm on the other hand is a bit different, and I can't recall exactly what the differences are, but a quick google would explain them. While there are differences, you can still get a 9mm conversion barrel, and it will operate just fine for range use. I would stick to the 40/357 barrels for carry. I had a Glock 32, with a spare 23 barrel and a lone wolf 40-9 conversion barrel, and never had any problems with function, when using the 9mm barrel.Quote:
Originally Posted by KevDen2005
IIRC- Glock recommends that when changing calibers between 9-357 SIG and 40 that the extractors and recoil springs be changed also.
I remember this being a topic of discussion and I believe this was what was suggested. I would have to look through some notes to confirm though.
The points of ammo cost and availability are valid for 357 Sig. You are going to have a hard time finding it at WalMart or Ace Hardware in Last Chance CO.
Glocks are fantastic sidearms if you keep in mind a couple of things:
Does it fit your hand well?
Keep your finger out of the guard until the sights are on target.
G36 > everything else
I'm fairly certain you are correct on the extractors and recoil springs. However for range use, it shouldn't be necessary, at least it wasn't in my case. Also 357 mags will work for 40 and vice versa, but again we are talking range use here. I wouldn't recommend anything other than factory setup for Carry use.Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
To switch between 40 and 357 sig just switch the barrel, I have used 9mm conversion barrels without swapping anything else but mags and it worked flawless. If it was a fulltime carry conversion you would want to swap ejector and extractor. To me the 357 sig is more fun to shoot then the 40 but the cost keeps me shooting 40.
You might want to be careful about referring to a Glock by both model number AND caliber. It upsets the purists. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyshoe
Thank you all for your input! I guess I was wondering about ballistics. I know that the .357 sig is zippy and a straight (level) shooter, but I am not sure if it holds benefit over the .40 s/w when cost per round is compared. I have read that the .357 sig is wasted in short barrels like those in the glock sub-compacts. Just to be careful, I'm not going cover barrel length because I don't wanna upset any purists[Tooth].
I've looked at several ballistics charts and gel penetration/expansion tests, but I start getting lost when people say that a 9mm +p+ is the same as a .357 sig and then i just give up.
Again, thanks for your input!
joeyshoe
I've spent a fair amount of time in my day, beating myself up over which caliber will be the most effective. I've carried .38sp, 9mm, 357 sig, 40s&w, and 45ACP. Finally, one day I just kind of saw the light, and realized "gee, I shoot 9mm far better than any of the others, that's the caliber that will be most effective for ME".
A good 9mm +p+ is still going to fall 100 fps or so slower than a mild 357sig, it just isn't quite as fast. As far as 357sig vs. 40, you'd be well served with either, provided you can put them where they need to go. While not feasible for most, your best bet would be to shoot a 26/27/33, and see which one you like best. I still say go with a 26 and you'd be set. Much cheaper ammo, higher capacity, very likely you'd be able to shoot it better than the 27 and 33, just my opinion.
Probably some of the best advice ever. Won't matter what you shoot if you cant hit what your aiming at.Quote:
Finally, one day I just kind of saw the light, and realized "gee, I shoot 9mm far better than any of the others, that's the caliber that will be most effective for ME".
Good point. I actually hate that some PD's require a certain gun. A lot of smaller females and males too I suppose would rather have a 9mm and shoot VERY well with it, then you hand them the .40 and they aren't nearly as good. I think I would rather have someone protecting me as well as backing me up that can shoot very well rather than okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurley842002