.38 Super and .357 Sig...

[flamdrags]

What's the difference?

I know the casings are different.
I know the bullets are within .001" of each other.
I own a .357 Sig and love it, so this is no trolling match, please.
I've come to believe that the .357 Sig was developed to match the ballistics of the .357 Magnum in a "reasonable" (read: non-Desert Eagle) platform. I never knew anything about the .38 Super cartridge until I starting reading up and learing about 1911's.
So what is it that makes the .357 Sig different or better than a .38 Super?
Does a .38 Super *have* to be fired from a 1911 platform?
Which has "better" ballistics?

Thanks for the info inadvance! When I have questions, I know where to come!

[TMan]

flamdrags said:

... When I have questions, I know where to come!

Whoops, just when I was going to tell you where to go. ;D

Okay first some data courtesy www.ammoguide.com




Notice that the 357 Sig is traveling down the road a little faster than the others shown. However, its muzzle energy is less than the 357 Magnum because the average bullets are lighter.

Which would be more accurate? I've never gotten clear data on accuracy of any particular caliber. I recently (3 hours ago) purchased my first rifle in 22-250 caliber because I was told it is nearly as accurate as the .222 - opinions, opinions, opinions. I've also heard that the 38 Super is an accurate round that some shoot with wad-cutters. Certainly with higher velocity, compared to 45 ACP, given the same rate of twist, the bullet would be revolving faster. Notice how much faster the 38 Super is than the 45 ACP.

The design point for the 357 Sig certainly wasn't for accuracy, and some ranges consider it a magnum round. I've seen signs that say: "No magnums or 357 Sig". No problem with shooting 38 Super.

I think of the 38 Super as a round you would be shooting paper targets with, but I don't think of the 357 Sig in the same terms.

You are kind of limited in the guns that shoot the 38 Super; most of them are 1911's, but Taurus does have something a little different:



I don't normally think of 357 Sig as a competitor of the 38 Super, but of the 40 S&W, which has pretty much the same design points.

["DoubleAction"]

I have three different size formats of the 357 sig with the Sig Sauer pistols, and one 38 Super in the Sig P-220. Both the 38 Super and 357 sig cartridges pushes the 9mm size bullet at high velosities but the 357 sig does so using a larger necked down case, which is of the same size as the .40 S&W case ( thicker cases walls than the .40 S&W case)

While the 125 grain bullet of the 357 sig is more known for duplicating some 125 grain bullets of the .357 magnum, which is used primarily in police duty revolvers, in velosity, it has become a favoite for some law enforcement agencies who went from the .357 magnum revolver platform.
The 38 Super has been around since 1929, when Colt introduced it in the .38 Colt Super Automatic Government Model. Up until the introduction of the .357 magnum, the 38 Super was the most powerful Handgun cartridge developed by an American manufacturer.
Although most associate the 38 Super with those on and around circles of competition sport shooting, I can purchase the Gold Dot defensive bullets in 38 super through Georgia Arms. The popularity of the 38 Super also grew well in Mexico, where citizens were restricted from owning firarms chambered in military calibers. I have several thousand rounds of the 130 grain Mexican Aquila ammunition, which handles much like the 357 sig.
I do like the bottle necked 357 sig case for it's feeding reliability in the fully supported chambers of the Sigs, as opposed to some straight wall cases in the 38 Super with the Sigs. I started out with a factory 16 lb. recoil spring on the P-220 in 38 Super and ended up with a 20 lb. spring to chamber the 38 Super more reliable. I have since polished the integral ramp, going into the chamber, hoping this would improve feeding.
I have heard some refer to the 38 Super as 9mm magnums, I like it and would not mind having a Colt lightweight commander chambered for it.
I was very fortunate to obtain a P-220 chambered in 38 Super, otherwise I probably would have never found much interest in the cartridge with the 357 sig being what it is.

[flamdrags]

I've read where Rob Lathem used the .38 Super to qualify for major in IPSC. Since the .357 Sig beats the 38 Super in both muzzle velocity and muzzle energy does that mean that .357 Sig would be a major caliber in IPSC as well? I have no intension of shooting it at IPSC, it's just a question.

And once again, thanks for the great info.

-Flamdrags

[MLB]

I could be wrong here, but I thought that the .38 super was used extensively by IPSC shooters since it could be loaded to the minimum "power" required to qualify as major. Going with the .357SIG would put you at a disadvantage wouldn't it?

[flamdrags]

Ok, that's what I was thinking...
.357 Sig would in fact be major but because of the recoil it wouldn't be advantageous (ignoring the cost factor as well). Does that sound right?

So it's not that the 38 Super is *more* powerful than the 357 Sig, it's that it can reach the minimum of "major" power in IPSC.