I used it in my P229. I liked it but back then the ammoe was a little hard to come by. I mostly use the .40 Cal barrel now due to more available ammo. Recoil is there but its not bad at all. I think there is very little difference in recoil between .40 and .357 sig personally. Verify this through the manufacturer for safety purposes but if the G22 has a .357 barrel as an after market option. The pressures should be well within its ability to handle it.

Recoil should not be too bad. The only complaint I tend to hear from guys who shoot .357 Sig is the cost of the ammo and sometimes difficulty finding it (strangely enough, where I live, you can usually find really good defensive loads for .357 Sig in gun stores and pawn shops, but your basic going to the range sort of ammo is harder to locate). Changing the barrel on the Glock should not be a problem at all. Also note that Bar-Sto can install a fitted 9mm barrel as well allowing you to fire 9x19 in the same handgun as well (Glock does not recommend this as a bit of home gunsmithing, but the Bar-Sto is professionally fitted and such).

What does .357 SIG bring to the table that good quality, +P 9x19, or .40S&W ammo dosen't. Not talking ****, I really don't know. Thanks, Cato

Personally I'd take a .40S&W over .357 or 9mm any day of the week. Bigger holes mean more lethality for pistols, and that's the simple truth. The advantage of .357 sig over 9mm is simply velocity. The .357 is a marketing name, since the bullets are of the same caliber as 9mm. I don't have the data in front of me, but as I recall it's about 200(maybe 300) fps more for the .357 Sig over a 9mm. Honestly I never much saw the point to the round in a world full of 38 super, and other fast 9mm cartridges which already existed. buzzard

Buzzard, You've pretty much summed up the picture I had been developing. I guess that there is a reason that something like 60-70% of law enforcement agencies have switched to .40 S&W. IIRC SIG went with the nome de guerre ".357" because of the rather irrational American phobia of 9x19. Form your knowledge (obviously greater than mine) does the SIG Super 9mm (hehe) have issues with overpenetration? Do you know how this round compares with 10mm Auto in terms of recoil and penetration? Thanks, Cato

"Bigger holes mean more lethality for pistols, and that's the simple truth" Thats not really true and I'm talking from experience. You can shoot a man with a .45 ACP or even a .44 Mag and not kill him. Its all about shot placement. Of course you have to have a decent round within reason, say .380 and above. Once you have that in a package that makes precise delivery of those rounds achievable then you dont need a big bullet. Also bullet velocity is only one part of the equation. More important is bullet construction. Does the bullet expand properly and penetrate deep enough after passing through barriers is the proper question. At any velocity beyond that its just BS(Brochure Statistic) for pistol calibers.

"What does .357 SIG bring to the table that good quality, +P 9x19, or .40S&W ammo dosen't. Not talking ****, I really don't know. Thanks," Against human targets from a pistol...NOTHING except less rounds, more cost and more recoil.

IIRC SIG went with the nome de guerre ".357" because of the rather irrational American phobia of 9x19. Form your knowledge (obviously greater than mine) does the SIG Super 9mm (hehe) have issues with overpenetration? Do you know how this round compares with 10mm Auto in terms of recoil and penetration? 10mm is by far more powerful in both respects. Proper bullet can save you from overpenetration but it is a beast of a round. Like a .357 Mag but for autos.

The original idea was to make an auto cartridge that matched the ballistics of the legendary .357 Magnum with a 125 grain bullet, still considered to be one of the best manstoppers ever. Nothing's perfect, of course, but many feel that caliber and load came close. Many agencies have adopted the .357 SIG round, mostly state police and highway patrol agencies. The Texas DPS loves it, and that's saying a lot in a state where the 1911 first gained widespread acceptance for law enforcement. The Texas Rangers were among the first LE agencies to adopt the .45 ACP, you know, because "They don't make a .46 ACP." I've never fired the .357 SIG, and don't know much about it exept from heresay.

"Thats not really true and I'm talking from experience. You can shoot a man with a .45 ACP or even a .44 Mag and not kill him. Its all about shot placement. Of course you have to have a decent round within reason, say .380 and above. Once you have that in a package that makes precise delivery of those rounds achievable then you dont need a big bullet. Also bullet velocity is only one part of the equation. More important is bullet construction. Does the bullet expand properly and penetrate deep enough after passing through barriers is the proper question. At any velocity beyond that its just BS(Brochure Statistic) for pistol calibers." Honestly I don't see anything which contradicts my statement. Of course shot placement is key. You're not going to kill someone shooting off a pinky. Thanks for the expert tip there. However for a given placement of the shot, a bigger hole is more lethal. I don't see how you could dispute that. If you want my guidelines of how to choose a caliber- Pick the gun which suits your hand well and is controllable, in at least 380. If you can handle a .40 S&W or .45 ACP, I favor those since they are more lethal for a given target area. Most studies have indicated this, and it stands to reason. A pistol wounds pretty much only by tearing stuff up in its path. The bigger the path, the more damage. As for bullet construction, pretty much any common caliber has plenty of worthy self defense options avialable. Unless you try to be a cheapskate, you can easily get a solid choice in a JHP. Though you do bring up a good point which can be used against the .357 SIG. It is possible that they will overpenetrate given the high velocity. You'd have to go with an easy expanding bullet type. Maybe Speer Gold Dot or something. buzzard