Underwood 357sig Under Rated Velocity

Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by Pilot172, Dec 11, 2019.

  1. Railsplitter

    Railsplitter

    Messages:
    6,778
    Likes Received:
    4,975
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014

    It might not be 50 percent more performance. It could be less than 50% it could be more than 50% every shot and every fight is different. Who is to proclaim exactly how much energy will be needed in a particular instance.

    What is correct is that gun fights only last a very few seconds so you want every shot to be as accurate as possible and hit as hard as possible. There will be no time for interweb theory, opinions or hunting stories.
     
    Pilot172 likes this.
  2. Railsplitter

    Railsplitter

    Messages:
    6,778
    Likes Received:
    4,975
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014

    You must have missed the part where I said "what ever the bullet design or type". This isn't really a debate it you don't read what others post and just keep repeating the same things over and over out of habit.
     

  3. Railsplitter

    Railsplitter

    Messages:
    6,778
    Likes Received:
    4,975
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014

    Found this recent test on the UA 115gr XP and 65gr XD rounds. Velocity was very good for both rounds even in obviously cold weather. The velocities of these rounds seem high but what is important is that they obviously are still full power UA rounds.

    At one point a close up of the ammo box was shown and the lot # on the box indicated a production date of about one year ago. This could indicate that Underwood's velocity reduction was only for the 125gr GD round.


    Can't say I care much for his f...ed up test methods.


    View: https://youtu.be/fmqLYA3E7-M
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2020
  4. fredj338

    fredj338

    Messages:
    32,329
    Likes Received:
    11,477
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    so.cal.
    Again, wrOng. Vel & energy mean almost nothng with a smooth solid or poor jhp. No enegy dump, no magic.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2020
    Teecher45 likes this.
  5. George Kaplan

    George Kaplan emeritus

    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    2,276
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2015
    Are you an Underwood or Lucky Gunner relative or something?
     
    Teecher45 likes this.
  6. George Kaplan

    George Kaplan emeritus

    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    2,276
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2015
    I don't misquote that line. Your made-up "balanced ballistic performance" line is hilarious. And who is this "miss quoted" person for whom you speak?
     
    Teecher45 likes this.
  7. George Kaplan

    George Kaplan emeritus

    Messages:
    1,697
    Likes Received:
    2,276
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2015
    Man fears what he does not know. You doubt the 9mm because you have not seen first hand what it can do.
     
    Teecher45 likes this.
  8. Pilot172

    Pilot172

    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    300
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Same can be said for the 357sig. I don't doubt the 9mm though, just feel more comfortable with the 357sig.
     
    Bus007 and fredj338 like this.
  9. 0311INF

    0311INF

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    1,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2014
    I don't like using Lucky Gunner results-as they (as does tnoutdoors9) use synthetic clear gel blocks that tend to be more forgiving than properly cured 10% FBI media. And certainly more forgiving than 20% NATO gel.
    But, as purely a basis for comparison, the LG results can be considered data with some value.
    From the loads tested using short barrels (3.4-3.5") in 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP, it's quite clear that 9mm as a whole has the weakest showing. Of 53 tested, only 8 get expansion above .60 and adequate 12-18" of penetration.

    .40 on the other hand, even with a slightly shorter barrel, has perhaps 20 loads that are getting those same results out of 40 tested.

    .45 with a short barrel can have a few issues, but still about 14 of the tested brands show results, out of 34 tested.

    The .357 Sig only has 9 loads tested and 4 of them show the .6"+ and 12-18" results.

    From the data taken as a whole, I think it's obvious that desired results are possible, even likely, using the highest performing ammunition available. However it is also clear that 9mm is a bit disappointing in all but the highest grade ammo. So carry 9mm in a CCW with confidence if you have personally vetted HST or Ranger T... but the vast majority of 9mm loads are not very impressive.

    As to the big three vs 357 Sig. The Sig data is light in comparison. What is very interesting is that none of the .357 Sig projectiles failed to expand. All the other calibers had a significant number of failures.
     
  10. fastbolt

    fastbolt

    Messages:
    24,445
    Likes Received:
    24,843
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Location:
    CA Central Coast
    Probably a nice combination of small caliber & bullet weight, making for comfortable recoil, but with the solid construction making for a bullet that resisted coming apart at close to 3000fps.
     
  11. fredj338

    fredj338

    Messages:
    32,329
    Likes Received:
    11,477
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    so.cal.
    Yes, the 9mm requires a better choice of ammo vs any larger bore. Hell, you can carry a 45 with ball ammo & be ok, I wouldn't but you could. That is the thing about the added vel of the 357sig, it is helpful in getting bullet performance. I just get tired of all this energy dump, lightning bolt BS. It just isn't real world.
    So my g26 runs HST 124gr+P, pretty much the equal of the majority of 40 loads available & I can land more of them faster. In the same size platform as a 40, I do prefer a 357sig, because I feel the recoil impulse is "flatter" & allows faster hits, but I have a 40 on my permit, fine with that too. I know my shooting ability is far more important than 50-150ft# more energy.
     
    Teecher45 likes this.
  12. 0311INF

    0311INF

    Messages:
    1,324
    Likes Received:
    1,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2014
    I understand what you are saying.
    But you could, when comparing like weighted 9mm and .357, substitute the term "added velocity" for "energy" as the equation is directly proportional.
    So that extra "50-150ft#" in that comparison means little more than added velocity, which helps bullet performance.

    I carry 9mm as well, in a G19, but am about to get a G26 (again). Do you think the short barrel specific cartridges do any better for the G26? Or are they basically a mild +p version of the same load in the regular box (i.e., a gimmick)?
     
  13. fredj338

    fredj338

    Messages:
    32,329
    Likes Received:
    11,477
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    so.cal.
    Not really. Velocity isn't energy, its velocity. So it only aids in bullet expansion. Solids don't expand, no gain unless bone is struck. Add'l vel may help or hurt a jhp performance. Bullets are designed for a specific window of performance. Push some too hard & you get fragmentation. If that significantly hurts penetration, not better.
    Not a huge fan of SB ammo. Just run a +p in the shorter bbl. The 124gr+P HST runs 1175fps +/- in my g26. SInce the bullet is designed for a bit more vel, you will get a little less expansion & a little more penetration.
    For years I only trusted a 357mag & 45 because jhp were so unreliable. Today things are better for smaller calibers & now I can carry a lighter/smaller 9mm with more rounds on hand because I do not believe 5rds is enough & know just how fast you can empty that in a dynamic engagement.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2020
    Teecher45 and CanyonMan like this.
  14. Pilot172

    Pilot172

    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    300
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Fred, I take it that you really don't buy into this velocity/energy thing, LOL. For 9mm, I do like the 124gr +P. That would be my choice.
     
    fredj338 and Teecher45 like this.
  15. Teecher45

    Teecher45

    Messages:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    1,525
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Just one account, and the only one I’ve seen.
    But who is it from? Link?
    I understand why you would think that, i really do. I used to think the same thing.
    The problem is, it’s just not playing out that way in the real-world. Some people that have much more data than you and I believe it’s mostly because the human body is elastic. The difference in energy between the service calibers aren’t enough of a difference to overcome the elasticity factor. The human body can absorb a certain amount of energy. The data shows that energy doesn’t come in to play until you get into rifle velocities.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    fredj338 likes this.
  16. Teecher45

    Teecher45

    Messages:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    1,525
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    What isn’t official about data from real-world “actual shootings”?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. Teecher45

    Teecher45

    Messages:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    1,525
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    I’ve not seen the tests where tnoutdoors9 uses synthetic gel. He may have at one time, but not any I’ve ever seen.
    Also, the advice given about choosing the best performing round in 9mm should also be stated for any caliber. There’s bad loads in every caliber for SD.
    Wanna guess why there’s so little data on the sig round?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  18. Pilot172

    Pilot172

    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    300
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    I do believe and understand the elasticity factor. But one would think when you see a gel block puff up to the size of a basketball, that has got to hurt like hell on your insides, elastic or not. The blocks do expand more with higher velocity. I know it may not be tissue damage due to elasticity, but the bigger the bubble, the more it hurts and could cause damage.
     
    Railsplitter likes this.
  19. Teecher45

    Teecher45

    Messages:
    3,401
    Likes Received:
    1,525
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    I deny it; 100%.
    But, then again, I’m confident in my abilities and don’t feel as though I need a more powerful caliber to try to make-up for my lack of skill or training.
    Everyone else may be different...



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  20. Pilot172

    Pilot172

    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    300
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    LOL, I guess we're both confident then. It's not lack of skill for me, but rather I have the skill to shoot the higher energy round. For me, I think it's worth the trade off of capacity and recoil.
     
    Bus007 and Railsplitter like this.