9mm vs. .357 magnum-a couple myths busted

[ranger99]

So here's the deal: in the recent past, I've been hearing about how 9mm is just as effective a round as .357 magnum, at the range, from various Youtube 'experts,' as well as magazine articles, and even on this forum. And when I say 'effective,' I mean energy delivered to target and damage created by bullets. 

This never made much sense to me, as it's pretty easy to eyeball a 9mm cartridge vs. a .357 magnum cartridge, or disassemble one and see the difference in powder charges. But the 9mm fans will poo-poo away these differences, usually saying something along the lines of "there's so much gas leakage at the forcing cone of a revolver that it cancels any advantage the .357 magnum has in greater powder charge." Or that all testing of .357 magnums to achieve the velocities stated are done with 8-inch barreled guns, and that if 4- or 2-inch barreled revolvers were used no .357 magnum round would be faster than a typical 9mm round.

Well, Mr. Paul Harrell, which many of us are familiar with, finally did a test of this myth, and the myth is finally busted. Enjoy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2t...em-subs_digest

And the best part about all of this is that my sense of reality has been proven correct.

[Jason D]

Not going to waste 16 minutes of my life watching some douche try to justify why the 9mm is better than all other rounds.

The 9mm will never equal a real .357 load. 

[ranger99]

 

4 minutes ago, Jason D said:

Not going to waste 16 minutes of my life watching some douche try to justify why the 9mm is better than all other rounds.

The 9mm will never equal a real .357 load. 

Um, actually he proves the exact opposite of that.  He proves the .357 magnum round is a much more effective round than the 9mm.

[CalmerThanYou]

Yeah, his findings do not surprise me.  Although putting shots on target is really important, and for my personal skills, that is where 9mm excels.

Everyone has a different skill set.  Every now and then some older dude stands next to me at the 200 Yrd bench and rings steel @ 200 with some giant hand cannon.  Clearly his thing.

[ranger99]

51 minutes ago, CalmerThanYou said:

Yeah, his findings do not surprise me.  Although putting shots on target is really important, and for my personal skills, that is where 9mm excels.

Everyone has a different skill set.  Every now and then some older dude stands next to me at the 200 Yrd bench and rings steel @ 200 with some giant hand cannon.  Clearly his thing.

Agreed, putting rounds on target is a lot more important.  As I understood it, the test was simply to prove whether or not the 9mm +P was really as powerful a round as the .357 magnum.  I posted the video because this myth has been stated to me several times at various ranges, as well as in a couple threads on two different forums.  I even came to believe it to some extent, especially as it pertains to snub-nosed revolvers, so I was very surprised that Mr. Harrell found that even from a short-barrel, the .357 magnum was significantly more powerful.

[Old School]

If the topic intrigues you, I suggest shooting both and deciding for yourself.

[PNWguy]

13 hours ago, CalmerThanYou said:

Yeah, his findings do not surprise me.  Although putting shots on target is really important, and for my personal skills, that is where 9mm excels.

 

Why not carry a .22 then?

Yes, I know...  It just seems that that's the most talked about advantage of the 9mm is the recoil and capacity.  I hadn't owned a 9mm since 1987 until I bought a Shield last year and then my G19 a couple of months ago.  I bought the G19 for GSSF as everyone told me that the reduced recoil of the 9mm was essential for success.  I discovered that the 9mm had to go fast to be accurate and going fast made the recoil virtually identical to my lower powered and more accurate .40 S&W loads.

I just don't get the hype of the 9mm...

 

[O4L]

I'll post the same response here to your thread that I posted on TFL.

I've never heard of anyone on any forum claiming that 9mm is as hot as .357 magnum.

I have heard people claim that 9mm +P+ is as hot as .357Sig.

[CalmerThanYou]

If you can shoot the balls off a chipmunk @ 25 Yrds with your .40 S&W, good for you.  You found your skill set.  If I get time to plan, for me my most accurate close quarters 100+/- Yrds choice is a Sig MPX with a brace stock, because that is my niche.  Many hours at the range have taught me I do best with a light weight firearm, with minimal recoil for quick follow up, cheek welded or put to my shoulder.  Hopefully everyone knows with what they are best at.

Edited November 3, 2017 by CalmerThanYou
Added distance for clarity

[jame]

On 11/2/2017 at 8:39 PM, ranger99 said:

So here's the deal: in the recent past, I've been hearing about how 9mm is just as effective a round as .357 magnum, at the range, from various Youtube 'experts,' as well as magazine articles, and even on this forum. And when I say 'effective,' I mean energy delivered to target and damage created by bullets. 

 

I've never, ever heard that, and simply shooting at a 1/3 sized IDPA target at my range with both guns will make it crystal clear which is more powerful.

That's only one point of contention, of course.  There's also recoil recovery, as well as intended use, among many other things.

For simple domestic defensive carry, it's my CZ P-07.

For coyotes howling 25 to 50 yards off the back deck, salivating to get my house cat or my Miniature Pincer, my GP100 gets the nod.

Different caliber, different gun, different intended purpose.

At least for me.

[fortyofforty]

Velocity.  Diameter.  Bullet characteristics.  Pretty simple.

But, actually, endlessly complex.  The acclaimed .357 magnum 125 grain semi-jacketed hollowpoint is unequaled in semiautomatics, and not reproducible in 2017.

[Danoobie]

On 11/3/2017 at 12:31 PM, Old School said:

If the topic intrigues you, I suggest shooting both and deciding for yourself.

Doing a little range ballistics IS a real eye opener. The 9mm is OK, but it ain't .357, pure and simple.

There was a time when LE used revolvers with 38 Special and .357, and it served, and served well, for

decades. Forward to now, when cops are having issues, from glock leg syndrome to the 9mm coming under 

fire as an ineffective round, in some instances.  We now have space-age polymers, 15 round mags,  modern

auto-loader design, and it all seems to pale, in comparison to the trusty old DA/SA wheel gun 38, of times past... 

[M2 Carbine]

On ‎2‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 1:52 PM, Danoobie said:

Doing a little range ballistics IS a real eye opener. The 9mm is OK, but it ain't .357, pure and simple.

There was a time when LE used revolvers with 38 Special and .357, and it served, and served well, for

decades. Forward to now, when cops are having issues, from glock leg syndrome to the 9mm coming under 

fire as an ineffective round, in some instances.  We now have space-age polymers, 15 round mags,  modern

auto-loader design, and it all seems to pale, in comparison to the trusty old DA/SA wheel gun 38, of times past... 

In 1960 I was a Policeman in Baltimore's Black Ghettoes.  We carried 6 shot 38's.  The 357 (and I had one) was considered to be too powerful for Police work.

I don't remember ever feeling "undregunned" or having someone challenge me because my gun wasn't powerful enough.

[Maccabeus]

15 hours ago, M2 Carbine said:

In 1960 I was a Policeman in Baltimore's Black Ghettoes.  We carried 6 shot 38's.  The 357 (and I had one) was considered to be too powerful for Police work.

I don't remember ever feeling "undregunned" or having someone challenge me because my gun wasn't powerful enough.

 

Some decades later in the age of S&W 3rd gen semi-autos, I hired on with a dept. that gave all the rookies the aging S&W681s while issuing 4006s to everyone else.  We also weren't permitted to load it with magnum rounds.  The 38+Ps did their job.  In fact, a few of the senior guys who'd carried wheel guns their whole career chose to keep their 681s and not transition to the .40s.  On several occasions, those revolvers were effectively put to use. 

When I went through semi-auto transition, I choose to carry the optional 4506

In fact, I still like a good wheel gun whether it's filled with .357 or .38+P.  I just picked up one of these:

But, at the same time, when I'm carrying, it's usually a 9mm

Even if it isn't a match for .357 magnum.

Edited February 22, 2018 by Maccabeus

[G26S239]

I don't need to watch a video to realize the 357 magnum has a clear power advantage. I have lot more 9mms than 357s and I like the 9mm but it clearly doesn't match up power wise.

[G19 DB]

Yeah, velocity matters.   Here's a pic of two gold dots - one from a 357 mag at nearly 1700 fps, the other from the 9mm.  Guess which one is 357mag?

[AgentM79]

The S&W 681 was a great service revolver, and would be my choice if I could only have "one gun".  I have a 681-3, but it is a safe queen.  I also put in "quality time" this range cycle with my new 640-3.  Hogue "Tamer" grips make it perfect, and shootable with magnum ammo.  This gun is now in my off-duty carry rotation.

The 9mm Glock IS the best combat handgun on the planet, though, because adequate power, sustained fire capability, fast follow-up shots, and rapid reloads beat "six for sure" - even when those six rounds are more powerful than the 9mm.

That is my take on the issue.  I like both calibers for different reasons.

[DonD]

Energy does count, sorry about that for those who disagree.  With comparable slugs, no 9mm can come close to the energy a .357 puts on target.  My Ruger SP101 runs 1320fps/611 ft lbs with 158gr Buffalo Bore JHPs, ballistics no 9mm can even remotely touch, this out of a 3" not a 6" long slide.  And yes, it is controllable and puts rounds well inside COM at typical CCW distances.  Is a 5-rd cylinder a handicap?  Doubtful, how many CCW defensive situations have required 5 or more rounds?  Very few instances of two or more assailants.  

Not knocking the 9mm, it's one of my 3 CCW guns, the SP, a SR9C and for pocket carry, a reliable Ruger LCP. Don

[Dric902]

Both bullets are nearly the same diameter (I’ve messed up and reloaded 9mm in 357s before) weight is close 115 grain vs 125

but the 357 wins at velocity. So being near equal.....the 357 wins

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by Dric902

[Haldor]

My opinion is that out of a pocket carry sized weapon, 9mm is significantly more effective than .357 magnum.

Here is a perfect real world example, Speer Gold Dot Personal Protection, Short Barrel ammo. This is ammo optimized for use in pocket carry sized weapons.

https://www.speer-ammo.com/ammunition?product-group=gold-dot-short-barrel-personal-protection

125g .357 mag rated at 950 FPS.

124G 9mm +p is rated at 1150 FPS.

Then consider how much easier it is to shoot a pocket sized semi-auto accurately in a hurry, versus a comparably sized revolver. Don't conflate the accuracy you are able to get in deliberate single action mode with a revolver. Instead think about the shotgun pattern sized groups most people end up with when trying to shoot a high power revolver quickly in double action mode.

A 9mm semi-auto will be lighter, more compact, have higher ammo capacity and be easier to shoot quickly than a .357 mag revolver. 9mm is a much better choice than .357 mag in the kinds of weapons most of us carry every day for self defense.

J-Fame versus Ruger LC9 size comparison. Five rounds of .357 Mag versus eight rounds of 9mm.

Sure .357 mag is much more powerful than 9mm once barrel length reaches 4". But think about exactly how big a 4" barreled revolver is. If I am willing to go that big, I would much rather carry my G20 in 10mm. The G20 will again be lighter and more compact. It will shoot a heavier bullet at a faster velocity. It will also have more than double the ammo capacity and will let me make faster more accurate follow up shots. I like revolvers, but there is no valid reason I can think of to prefer a revolver for self defense versus a comparably sized semi-auto.

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by Haldor
Added pic

[fideau]

Paul Harrell is the real thing, not one of those keyboard experts all over YouTube.  

When I was still issued the S&W686 and my dept. was considering changing to semi-auto, I was on the range one day and my DS was there with a Beretta 92FS.

He challenged me on the falling plates/dual popper. In case anyone wonders, 5 steel plates each and a falling steel silhouette each, they were angled so the loser would fall on top. So, my 6 shot .357 against his 15 round 9mm. While he was splashing lead on his plates, I was knocking them off with one shot until I hit the last one and turned it sideways, had to use my last shot to knock it off. He had fired all of his on the five plates so it was my sk speed loader against his reload. 

I won. I had 158 Gr. JSP ammo, don't know what he was shooting. 

[fortyofforty]

When I go looking for trouble, I would indeed feel inadequately armed with a five shot, and only slightly less so with six.  I've seen Jerry Miculek reload a revolver in fractions of a second; I'm not him.  I'd rather have a lot more rounds on board before my first reload comes due.  That pretty much means 9mm or .40 S&W for me.

Recently, what was supposed to be one individual turned out to be two.  I had thirty on board my primary, but it was not necessary to use any.  If they had fought back with firearms, I would have felt undergunned with a five shot.

That is when I go looking for trouble.  What about when trouble goes looking for you?

[Boogieman]

What does shooting cinder blocks and pumpkins have to do with stopping a deadly encounter?

[crockett]

Our first caliber war and I'm missing out..? World's coming to an end!

[fortyofforty]

9 hours ago, crockett said:

Our first caliber war and I'm missing out..? World's coming to an end!

Nah, you're here now.  Plenty of time to jump in.  It'll be going on long after we're gone.  Then it will be "Laser Weapon System vs. Railgun".