.40 S&W the bullet of the new millenium


PDA






armedpolak
October 30, 2006, 08:34 PM
is it true that people move away from 9mm for self defense to more powerful rounds, aka .40S&W ? wasn't it invented just for that purpose, to deliver more stoping power ? lot of police offices are switching to .40.

so what's up with .40 S&W ?
tell me, why do I carry it ? :D

If you enjoyed reading about ".40 S&W the bullet of the new millenium" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
orionengnr
October 30, 2006, 08:39 PM
I owned six .40s not that long ago...down to one now.

Summer-9mm pocket carry, Winter--45 acp (IWB) do all I need.

BTW--
Glock 23 for sale, approx 400 rounds through it, seven mags, DFW area.
PM me. :neener:

Soybomb
October 30, 2006, 08:39 PM
How am I supposed to know why you carry it? :neener:

People choose .40 for a lot of reasons. Some are valid reasons, some are simply not true.

Big Calhoun
October 30, 2006, 08:43 PM
I carry the .40 because of its reputation as a performer, its a fun and snappy round to shoot, and b/c it was the first handgun caliber I ever shot with and am comfortable with it. I also carry .45. A little bit more punch than the .40...for when you want BANG! instead of POW! Just go with what floats your boat! :p

History Prof
October 30, 2006, 08:45 PM
My oldest brother was a serious shooter/collector before he passed away. So is his wife. After the introduction of the 40S&W, he and his wife traded all of their 9MM firearms away and he started buying at least two of everything - one in .40 and one in .45ACP. If it didn't come in both, he generally didn't buy it, except for his collection of 1911s.

After he died, I was helping his wife sort out parts of his collection when I found a loaded 9MM Ruger magazine. She was shocked, because not only did they give up on 9MM, but they gave up on Ruger, too!

Standing Wolf
October 30, 2006, 09:07 PM
If I were going to buy the .40, I'd buy the 10 mm.

Alan Fud
October 30, 2006, 09:08 PM
9mm for compacts & sub-compacts

.40 for compacts & mid-size

.45 for mid-size & full-size

M2 Carbine
October 30, 2006, 09:12 PM
I've got a lot of 40 S&W ammo loaded, a lot of brass, a Kel Tec P-11 9mm/40cal and IMI compact Eagle but I just can't seem to get interested in the 40 cal.

If I want a serious handgun round I use the 45ACP. Usually if I can carry a 9mm or 40 cal I can carry a 45.

zoom6zoom
October 30, 2006, 09:36 PM
.40 S&W the bullet of the new millenium

Repeat after me:

Cartridge
Cartridge
Cartridge

Cartidges go in, bullets come out.

Thanks, I needed to be anal for a moment and get that out of my system. Now back to our regularly scheduled thread.

Deer Hunter
October 30, 2006, 09:51 PM
I wish the 10mm got as much praise as it's bastard child, the .40 S&W.

lycanthrope
October 30, 2006, 09:52 PM
Feell free to quote me. I've shot about 40 deer/elk.....only a magnum with expanding bullets folds them fast.

"The .40 SW.......Good enough.......unitil you can put magnum caliber rounds on target."

BullfrogKen
October 30, 2006, 09:53 PM
armedpolak said: lot of police offices are switching to .40

Police departments. Don't infer the act of a department making a decision means an officer chose it.


The reasons why a police department makes a decision has very little do to with us or why it would be good for an individual. Hell, it might not even be good for the individual officer, but he very often has little choice but to accept it and adjust to it as best he can.

armedpolak said: wasn't it invented just for that purpose, to deliver more stoping power ?

Actually, history suggests it was developed as a reduced power alternative to the 10mm, which was cited as too powerful for the average shooter on the force to manage.

armedpolak said: tell me, why do I carry it ?

I don't know, why do you? Are you merely looking for validation? "More power"? Objectively, the increase in power is an incremental level.


Remember - All handguns are marginally effective at best.

Lonestar
October 30, 2006, 09:54 PM
Repeat after me:

Cartridge
Cartridge
Cartridge

Cartidges go in, bullets come out.

:rolleyes:

is it true that people move away from 9mm for self defense to more powerful rounds, aka .40S&W ? wasn't it invented just for that purpose, to deliver more stoping power ? lot of police offices are switching to .40.



:rolleyes:

Pretentious lot

Werewolf
October 30, 2006, 10:04 PM
is it true that people move away from 9mm for self defense to more powerful rounds, aka .40S&W ? wasn't it invented just for that purpose
Actually no (at least I'm pretty sure). The FBI needed a cartridge/caliber that would fill the need they decided needed filling after that fiasco shoot out in Florida. Voila - the 10mm was invented. A heck of a magnum round with perfomance almost equal to (but not quite) that of a .44 Mag. Turned out though that your average every day FBI guy - well - to put it nicely - was somewhat overwhelmed by the 10mm's power.

S&W stepped in and made the 10mm's baby brother - the .40 S&W. I won't go into the pluses and minuses of it - those are almost as numerous as the arguments made in a 9mm vs .45ACP discussion. I will say that I don't feel undergunned at all carrying a piece loaded with 180gr XTP's popping out of the barrel at 980 FPS.

CountGlockula
October 30, 2006, 10:06 PM
To me, anything with a .4_ or a .4_ and above, is a good stopper.

GroovedG19
October 30, 2006, 10:14 PM
2 .40 pistols here.A FN Hi Power and Sig P229.They are range/home defense pistols and also serve as back-up to my front line pistols.:evil:

kentucky_smith
October 30, 2006, 10:24 PM
With a ban in most states, the high-cap 9mm's weren't reaching their full potential and 7 .45s just don't seem like enough to some people. Since the ban went out, I think hicap 9's have made a comeback.

I got rid of my 40s cause I got too many calibers to keep up with.

Purely speculation though.

ptmmatssc
October 30, 2006, 10:25 PM
Have a few .40s as well as .45s . Carry both . .40s in compacts for summer , .45s full size in winter . Never have had to shoot anyone(yet) , but would trust either of these to do the trick . not to fond of the 9mm , but wouldn't mind a 10mm .

Wes Janson
October 30, 2006, 10:36 PM
I don't know too much about my cartridge history, but wasn't the 10mm around before the FBI started looking for a pistol cartridge with a heavier punch?

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2006, 10:57 PM
I don't know too much about my cartridge history, but wasn't the 10mm around before the FBI started looking for a pistol cartridge with a heavier punch?

Yes. It was devloped by Dornaus and Dixon with help from Norma in 1982 and introduced in the Bren Ten pistol in 1983. The FBI adopted it in the S&W 1076. The 1076 was designed specifically for the FBI and is the only one of the 10XX series to use a sig-type frame mounted safety/decocker. The 10 lite or 10mm FBI was also developed for the FBI. Some opportunist at S&W observed that the same ballistics of the 10 lite could be achieved in a shorter case, which could in turn be chambered in a slimmer pistol and the 40 S&W and 4006 were born. Ironically, Glock got the model 22 to market before the 4006.

3rdpig
October 30, 2006, 11:01 PM
Not long ago I had three .40 handguns, now I'm down to one. The recoil is just too snappy in a compact or subcompact for my tastes, it's unpleasant to practice with and it's slow putting successive rounds on target. Doubletaps with the .40 are absurdly slow using identical sized 9mm and .40 subs. I made my tests with a Glock 26 and Glock 27, subcompacts in 9mm and .40. I've made similar tests with a KT P11 and P40, both which I owned and a Kahr 9mm and 40, both which I rented. The resuts were the same.

I wound up selling both the P40 and the Glock 27 (sold the P11 too, but that's another story). The Glock 26 is a joy to practice with and quick to recover from the recoil for successive shots. I can simply shoot it much better than I can any similar sized .40 pistol. And for me that's the main thing, putting rounds on target accurately and quickly is more important than the size of that round. Since no handgun is a one shot stopper, and since I've usually got 45 rounds on hand (10+1 in the gun and two 17 round spare mags) I'm not worried about running out of ammo if I put three 9mm's on target instead of one .40.

And why should I care what the cops do? Most cops have no choice, they use the gun issued to them, like it or not. While I feel a Glock 22 (.40) is an excellent choice for a full sized sidearm, it wasn't their decision. If you really want to know what knowledgeable cops use, look at the cops that have a choice, SWAT team members for example. And no, an MP5 is not a sidearm!

In a mid sized or full size gun .40 is much more controllable, but no more so than .45. I've still got a Glock 22 and it's my nightstand gun, but only because it holds 15 rounds in the mags and my .45's only hold 7. Well, also because I'm now very familiar with the Glock trigger pull, it wouldn't make much sense for me to carry a Glock and use a DA/SA (P220) or SAO (1911) gun as a nightstand gun.

In summation the .40 is a good caliber and it fills a niche that some people may need (mostly due to the size of the grip), but there's not anything special about it.

Zen21Tao
October 30, 2006, 11:51 PM
is it true that people move away from 9mm for self defense to more powerful rounds, aka .40S&W ? wasn't it invented just for that purpose, to deliver more stoping power ? lot of police offices are switching to .40.

so what's up with .40 S&W ?
tell me, why do I carry it ?

Werewolf is rigfht, the .40S&W was developed for people that can't handle the 10mm. If you want the most power possible with the largest magazine capacity possible then the 10mm is the answer. In fact, My daily carry gun is a Glock 29 subcompact 10mm, I have a fullsize Kimber 10mm, I just bought a S&W 610 10mm revolver and I reload for 10mm. I hope this tells you just what I think of this round.

Soybomb
October 31, 2006, 12:41 AM
The 1076 was designed specifically for the FBI and is the only one of the 10XX series to use a sig-type frame mounted safety/decocker.
Actually the 1026 is also a frame mounted decocker with a full 5" barrel, the 1076's big brother if you will. While the FBI had their own variant without a mag safety I'm not sure if they were the only reason s&w made their frame decocker 10mm's or not.

kd7nqb
October 31, 2006, 01:28 AM
So, first of all I love .40s/w infact my next gun purchase will be the Springfield XD in .40cal, an old timer told me that a .40 was a necked down 10mm because 10mm is a propriatary caliber owned by Glock. Reading this thread I think he may have been wrong but I still have only seen 10mm in Glocks, does anybody else make 10mm guns?

BullfrogKen
October 31, 2006, 02:02 AM
kd7nqb said: but I still have only seen 10mm in Glocks, does anybody else make 10mm guns?

Yes. Lots of manufacturers, but its not as popular. One reason of many is it requires a large frame to accomodate the 10mm.


kd7nqb said: an old timer told me that a .40 was a necked down 10mm because 10mm is a propriatary caliber owned by Glock. Reading this thread I think he may have been wrong

I'm sorry, but your friend is quite mistaken.

Zen21Tao
October 31, 2006, 02:10 AM
So, first of all I love .40s/w infact my next gun purchase will be the Springfield XD in .40cal, an old timer told me that a .40 was a necked down 10mm because 10mm is a propriatary caliber owned by Glock. Reading this thread I think he may have been wrong but I still have only seen 10mm in Glocks, does anybody else make 10mm guns?

Look up at my post. In addition to my Glock 29 10mm I have a Kimber Stainless Target II 10mm and just bought a S&W 610 10mm revolver. Other 10mm include the Colt Delta Elite, EAA Witness, the Bren Ten, Dan Wesson Razor Back, and a number of S&W models.

Here is a link with many more:
http://marina.fortunecity.com/harbour/347/10mm06.html

Here is a link with detailed info on the creation of 10mm:
http://marina.fortunecity.com/harbour/347/10mm01.html

The .40 isn't "necked down." The 10mm and .40S&W both use a .401 diameter bullet. The casing for the .40 is just a little bit shorter than the 10mm's casing, much like the .38spl and the .357 magnum. The major benefit that came from using the slightly smaller .40S&W casing with less powder charge than the 10mm was that the 40S&W could be designed on a 9mm platform frame. This resulted in a round more powerful than 9mm (in many cases close to .45acp) with a magazine capacity almost as great as the 9mm.

Kurt
October 31, 2006, 02:15 AM
I rely on my three .40's because they have more rounds than comparable .45 guns and I can shoot heavier bullets than any 9mm.

Kurt
October 31, 2006, 02:26 AM
Forgot to add I also believe in its future longevity.

kengrubb
October 31, 2006, 03:10 AM
We gunowners are a fickle bunch. It's quite amazing that the .40 S&W enjoys such popularity. It is truly the new kid on the block along side of the 9mm Luger, .45 ACP, .38 Special, .357 Magnum and .380 ACP--which are all rather aged old farts compared to this teenager.

The search for how to cram a .357 Magnum into a 9mm casing has been afoot for 20 years--maybe more. 9mm +P+, 9mm AE, .356 TSW, .357 SIG, and 9x23 are some of the efforts. IMHO, the .356 TSW probably came closest to actually doing it.

Eventually, it simply became a matter of size and filling in the blank. The 9mm Mama Bear and .45 ACP Papa Bear led to the .40 S&W Baby Bear.

superhornet
October 31, 2006, 08:13 AM
Both the 9mm and 40S&w are fine. They offer low recoil and are suitable for woman LEO and FBI to be able to qualify....Real men use the 10mm....

psyopspec
October 31, 2006, 09:07 AM
tell me, why do I carry it ?

Can't answer that, but I could tell you why I don't.

Vitamin G
October 31, 2006, 09:19 AM
so what's up with .40 S&W ?
tell me, why do I carry it ?


Because you can't handle 10mm with your girly claws? :neener:

Steve 48
October 31, 2006, 09:22 AM
I own several 40 cal Glocks which I really like but I see a trend especially by LEO's to go to 45 cal. I like mine but I also feel more comfortable with a 45. Steve 48

Ala Dan
October 31, 2006, 09:52 AM
" Is .40 caliber the bullet of the NEW Millinuem"?

Heck, I have NEVER left the old century as I still prefer the .45 ACP.~!;) :D

Kentak
October 31, 2006, 10:19 AM
If I had to choose one caliber that had to serve recreational and defensive purposes, I would choose .40. 9mm would be second choice.

K

Legionnaire
October 31, 2006, 10:36 AM
Can't speak to "cartridge of the future" stuff; can only talk of my own experience.

When I decided to pursue a defensive handgun, I first decided that I wanted a semi-auto. Then I started reading up on cartridges. I was biased against the 9mm by my next door neighbor, a MD State Trooper, who didn't like the "wonder nine," claiming it was underpowered and citing stories of bad guys taking lots of 9mm hits and still carrying on the fight. I don't recall him ever saying what he would prefer, just that he didn't like the 9mm.

So I started reading. Read all about the development of the 10mm, and then the .40 S&W (10mm Kurz?). Sounded right, so I bought my first dedicated defensive handgun in .40 S&W. It's still my preferred CCW and training round. But I will admit to owning a Kahr PM9 (9mm), as I like it's diminuitive size. I even carry a Kel-Tec P32 in some circumstances. Don't know why I never really considered the .45 ACP. Still don't have one in the safe.

At this point, since I'm happy with what I have, I don't see the need to keep looking ...

atomchaser
October 31, 2006, 10:45 AM
I have one (Beretta 96) and it's my least favorite pistol. Snappy recoil. Much more pleasurable to shoot my Glock 20 or Dan Wesson Pointman 10mm.

modifiedbrowning
October 31, 2006, 10:48 AM
Nine is fine with me. 10 pistols and looking for more.

KC&97TA
October 31, 2006, 11:04 AM
.40S&W to me is a good trade off round, it packs more punch than a 9mm and has less recoil than a .45acp. But for what it's worth I got rid of my Ruger .40 and then latter got rid of my Glock 10mm, then bought and sold a Glock 22 when I missed the .40, for now I'm just to staying with 2 pistol calibers - 9 & .45

The Glock 20, a 10mm, will reliablely feed, chamber, shoot and eject .40S&W, from the same mags with the same 10mm barrel; I'm told it's a better Idea to buy a 22 .40S&W barrel when doing this, but it never gave me a problem, and served as a dual caliber weapon. The M20 is a full sized gun, I don't know if there's a midsize or compact version of it, been away from the Glocks for some time now.

For now in my youthfull age, I carry a 4" 1911 .45acp - I am a sick bird, and usally CCW wearing a sweatshirt or light jacket, printing will equal a felony. The High Cap issue doesn't really entertain me, with 8 rounds of 230gr +p Corbon.

Grandpa said "you stick a forty-five round in a man, he's going down".

progunner1957
October 31, 2006, 11:04 AM
I have a 9mm, I have a .40S&W and I have a .45ACP. I carry the .45ACP.

Why?? Performance is everything (hmmm... I think that's Les Baer Custom's sig line) and the .45ACP outperforms both the 9mm and the .40S&W.

Just last night, I shot a pumpkin in my back yard with a Federal EFMJ .45ACP
+P 200g. load, launched out of my Glock 21 (4.4" barrel). The results? Exit "wound" dimensions were 1/2" x 1", bullet retained 100% of original weight and expanded to .75" Now THAT'S impressive. And my Glock 21 will carry a full load of 14 of these rounds.

I would expect this round to be more effective at stopping an attacker than either a similar round in 9mm or .40S&W. With the Glock 21 and the Springfield XD45, you have the performance of the .45ACP and the high capacity of a wondernine - the best of all attributes. Given that, I can see no benefit to carrying a pistol chambered for a smaller round.

Zen21Tao
October 31, 2006, 11:14 AM
Let me add something about the 10mm. As a 10mm reloader one can always reduce the powder charge in 10mm rounds to achieve ballistics very similar to the .40S&W with (thanks to the larger 10mm frame) very low, and in some cases hardly any, recoil. If your goal is a pint sized highly concealable pocket pistol or IWB pistol then .40S&W is great (hince my Sig P239, Glock 27 and Kahr PM40). On the other hand, if you want a reasonably concealable versitile gun that can be used to push hot loads as powerful as a .41 magnum for hunting or with just a quick change of magazines push reduced loads with very litlle recoil for range shooting or plinking, then the 10mm wins hands down.


* As a side note. I have always been a big .45acp fan but after falling for the 10mm I find very few reasons for carrying a .45acp. Don't get me wrong, I still love the accuracy of a well tuned 1911 as range gun, but for carry purposes a 10mm is much more powerful with a higher magazine capacity.

jkomp316
October 31, 2006, 11:17 AM
.40 s&w is a good round. it wasn't highly welcomed at first, but its grown quite popular in recent years. 10mm would be great, however, factory loads are almost equal to .40 s&w and cost twice as much. if i could buy 100rds of 10mm at walmart for $17 then id say it was a good alternative. 9mm is probably more popular then .45, and if you look at its history, it was the NAZI round.

hankdatank1362
October 31, 2006, 01:50 PM
9mm is less "jumpy" in terms of recoil than a .40 (to me anyway). I started off with a full-size 1911 .45ACP as my primary carry gun, then down to a compact .40S&W. The .40 was too jumpy, and I found that I can put 5 or 6 rounds of 9mm on target faster than I can put 2 or 3 rounds of .40 on the same target.

Think, when confronted by a threat in a dark alley, would you rather shoot your .40 "pow", realign sights, "pow" again...

Or pull out your puny 9mm "Pow Pow Pow Pow Pow Pow" in a 3" circle COM?

Shoot whatever you're more accurate and effective with. I figue if it's worth shooting, it's worth shooting more than once.

51Cards
October 31, 2006, 02:32 PM
I started out with a SIG 229 in .40. At first, I thought it was a little too "punchy." Then, a funny thing --- I re-acquired an old WWII 1911, and got a new SA one. I found that the .45 got me shooting the .40 better. Different kind of felt recoil, and the .45 seemed more like doing slow weight-lifting.

Long story short (oh, sure!): Now I'm back "in love" with the 229. It can rapid-fire holes into a satisfactorily small circle. (With a LaserMax it becomes uncanny.)

My SA XD sub in 9mm seems like too much density for the number and caliber of cartridges; it shoots great, but now it feels like a popgun. Probably marginally more controllable. I have a good friend with the same gun in .40, and he swears it's a puddy-tat to shoot. (He's also a pretty large guy.)

My paws are all palm. A 229 packed with .40's fits; a high-cap .45 does not (at least, not comfortably). The 229 carries 11 rounds (in jolly NY); the 1911 carries 8 (cocked & locked, which I'm not a fan of).

So, I've come full-circle. The last one I'd ever get rid of is the 229 (.40).

Mulliga
October 31, 2006, 03:03 PM
9mm and .45 for me. Nothing like two World Wars to shake out the bugs. I prefer the cartridges of the old millenium. :)

shield20
October 31, 2006, 04:32 PM
Different posters got different points right...the .40 caught on like wild-fire -it was a huge success real quick in LE, especially as the more it got picked up the cheaper it got. Many LE were NOT happy with the 9mm - there was a constant search for the "best" round...115 vs 147 vs +p vs. +P+ vs. subsonic - and there were no clear winners, which meant all were 'subpar' - not much of a wonder after all. Now think about shooting .40 or 9mm in basically the same full-size duty/service gun (using the same holsters), and where recoil is NOT an issue in either case. I couldn't swap my 92 for a 96 fast enough! Yes, the 10mm had climbed a little when the FBI briefly resurrected it, but it still required a full-length grip, the weapons choice was small, the ammo expensive (especially after the recent temporary exodus to 9mm), and departments didn't have time to jump on the wagon before quickly the .40 was spouted as THE round, backed by no less then the F B I. This time though the results met the hype, and the round since has pretty much matched or exceded its expectations.

Along comes the AWB and civilians can have only 10 rounds of 9mm or 10 rounds of .40 - still in mid/large size guns (most subcompacts were .380 or smaller). No wonder so many chose the bigger caliber.

Now with subcompacts, polymers, lightweights, CCWs, ammo improvements, the AWB sunset, etc., the 9mm is hanging in there again, but my dealer STILL says many people won't even look at the 9s (in NY though, so capacity is still an issue). I WAS that way, till I wanted something small, and finally was open minded enough to compare how the recoil is in .40 vs 9mm in similiar smaller pieces. Now I let the platform I want dictate the caliber to shoot it in.

possum
October 31, 2006, 07:42 PM
I Have 2 .40 cal handguns right now and there are only three other handguns i can see me owning in the consivable future and they all will be .40 cal as well. a taurus pt1911, xd sub compact, and tactical model. those that I own that aren't .40 will be sold or traded in the near future. except the ruger 22/45 of course because it is a great trainning aid and a hoot to shoot. :)

why do you shoot .40 cal? beats me, but i know why i shoot it.

1) ammo economy, it is a little more expensive than 9mm yes but definetly less than .45 price wise and since most of my shooting is done through the xd, i use lead which also cuts down on cost.

2) i like to have as few as calibers as possible so that way i buy only a few types of ammo, and once i start reloading i can have a progressive press for handgun and be set.

3) with a .40 handgun you get more capacity than a .45acp, and more knock down power than, the, 9mm.

4) since i have small hands, it is great that the .40 cal fits into the same frame size as the 9mm handguns which is a big plus for me.

5) the final and most important reason in which i can think of right now is the fact that I am comfortable with the cartridge, and it works for me. I love the .40s&w and plan to shoot it forever!

modifiedbrowning
October 31, 2006, 08:40 PM
if you look at its history, it was the NAZI round.
:rolleyes:
Among others.
The English as well as other European nations used the 9mm as well. Does that balance out the evilness of the 9mm? :rolleyes:

wally
October 31, 2006, 10:08 PM
According to the History Channel, the 9mm was not really invented, but was a kludge to slavage most of George Lugers tooling investment after the German Army accepted the pistol but only if made in a larger caliber than the original .30 Mauser round he used initially. He also made a pair of Lugers in .45ACP for the US Army who demanded a .45 but after the German Army accepted his 9mm he had more business than he could handle and withdrew from the US trials. The remaining .45 Luger gun (one was destroyed in testing, and there are Chinese knock-offs) is said to be a "million dollar gun". The 9mm pre-dates the Nazi's and was chosen by the Kaiser before WWI.

All these years I'd though the 9mm was a careful optimization giving about the same muzzle energy as the .45ACP with a cartridge of half the weight. But we all know there is more to it than just muzzle enegry for handguns.

I really like the .40S&W for sub-compacts, prefer .45ACP in full sized guns, and shoot lots of 9mm because its about as cheap to buy as .45 or .40 is to reload. All three work for me.

--wally.

boomstik45
October 31, 2006, 10:53 PM
The .40 has a place, just like all the other most common pistol calibers. While smaller than the .45, it is faster and can be loaded for some real speed. No, it won't compare favorably to the mighty 10mm, but then nothing short of a magnum will, not even the hallowed .45 (one of my favorites). But 10mm costs more all the time due to a lesser production level. Unless of course, you have the knowledge, skill, time, and money to reload. I don't. I love the 10, and will have another some time (Glock 20, baby!), but I'll stick with 9s, 40s, and .45s for autoloaders. Ammo is and will be much more widely available, no matter where I go, which is important to me. I like the .40, there's nothing "weak" about it. That's like a .500 magnum shooter saying that .44 magnum is weak. But you cannot deny the results of a .44 and NOBODY wants to get shot by one, now do they? Same can be said of the .40 S&W. It's just a choice, and this round has been proven to be effective. So has the 9mm.

And since when does shooting pumpkins prove anything important? I've shot one with an Aguila hyper velocity .22lr fired out of a Phoenix Arms pistol. The exit hole (oh yes, it went right through it) was greater than the diameter of a .38 easily. But you won't see me carrying that around unless it's all I've got...

Coronach
October 31, 2006, 11:14 PM
The guy who thout the .40 was a necked down 10mm and proprietary to Glock was probably thinking of the .45 GAP and the .45 ACP. The GAP is not "necked down", but it is shortened from ACP, and the terminology might have gotten confused slightly, along with the second number to the right of the decimal. ;)

Mike

Geronimo45
October 31, 2006, 11:34 PM
The .40 S&W was invented so DEA agents could shoot themselves without doing lethal harm. You want proof?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6s-zU
:neener:

kengrubb
November 1, 2006, 02:01 AM
The guy who thout the .40 was a necked down 10mm and proprietary to Glock was probably thinking of the .45 GAP and the .45 ACP.
He mighta been thinking about the 400 Corbon--a .45 ACP necked down to .40
http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IVG12.html
http://glockmeister.com/400cb.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.400_Corbon

Coronach
November 1, 2006, 02:45 AM
Naw, I doubt anyone who had even heard of 400 Corbon could make that mistake- .40 as a "necked-down" 10mm and proprietary to Glock. Heck, the name of the cartridge is .40 Smith & Wesson. No matter how deficient the Austrians are in the aesthetics department, they're not daft in the marketing department. ;)


Mike

Phil DeGraves
November 1, 2006, 11:52 AM
.40 is a compromise caliber. It offers neither the magazine capacity, continuity of fire, low recoil or speed of followup shots as the 9mm, nor the bullet mass or wound channel size of the .45.

While the .40 S&W case may be new, .40 caliber bullets at 975 FPS isn't new either. The 38-40 of the 1870s is ballistically identical so there is already a body of data on its ballistic capabilities. All that being said, just because a Maryland State Trooper can't hit anything with his 9mm isn't a reason to blame the cartridge. The reasons people survive gunshot wounds are because they weren't shot in the right place. More often than not, "the right place" won't be able to differentiate between a 9mm, a .40 or a .45.

jubo
November 2, 2006, 02:27 PM
Copied and Pasted this into my notes just the other day... I didn't write it but found it very amusing and noteworthy:

The .45ACP was invented to kill people
The 9mm was invented to kill people
The 10mm was invented to kill people
The .357 Magnum was invented to kill people
The .357Sig was invented to emulate the .357 Magnum ... which was invented to kill people (If it does or not is another arguement)
The .40S&W was invented for the FBI because some agents could not shoot the 10mm well enough to qualify

jubo
November 2, 2006, 02:34 PM
And another... again no idea who wrote it:

“A good archer is not known by his arrows but by his aim”

Waaaay to much energy is put into the 9mm/40/45 debate... go and shoot.

(btw I have guns in all three calibres... but the only reason I have a 40 is all the free brass I get from the Police dept...):evil:

ZeSpectre
November 2, 2006, 04:01 PM
Not going to join the overall debate, just going to tell you my own experience and feelings on the matter.

I have a long history with wheelguns and a strong preference for the .357 Magnum round. Tried various .44 Magnums, never could shoot 'em worth a damn and went back to .357 (and .38's for fun).

Got introduced to the Springfield "XD" line all at once with an XD-9, and XD-40, and an XD-45 (all in 4" service configuration).

Firing the XD-9 I was very accurate. Perceived recoil and noise level were very light. My only issue was it just felt like a pop-gun to me (being used to .357 loads).

Firing the XD-40 I was not nearly as accurate (initially) but my instinctive feeling was that it was ME, not the gun or round. Perceived recoil and noise level seemed a little high, much like a .357 load. Put simply, I took to this weapon and round like a duck takes to water.

Firing the XD-45 I was slightly more accurate than the 40, but not quite as accurate as the 9mm. Perceived recoil and noise level seemed (to my surprise) quite a bit lower than the XD-40. But somehow it felt, well, I guess "lethargic" would be the best word. I don't know if that makes any sense to anyone else but it's the best description I can come up with.

So I practice with, and soon will CCW the XD-40 not the 9mm or .45ACP. Why? I'm not sure I can quantify it, the .40 just struck a chord with me. A little practice led to decent mastery of the gun and the round and now I think I'd feel lost with something else. (I'm especially excited about getting an XD-40 compact now).

Disclaimer: Can't rightly comment on actual performance against a meat target though. Never shot anything but paper or plinkin' targets with any pistol and hope I never actually have to do so.

Greg8098
November 3, 2006, 03:06 AM
The .40 s&w is basically the same as a 9mm +p in my opinion. I think at the rate things are going that 10mm auto will be the cartridge of the new millenium. Whats not to love, you basically have every service pistol cartridge and a couple of magnum revolvers' performance all in one cartridge depending on how you load it. Maybe the sleeping giant will finally rise up to claim its well deserved crown one day ;) .

boomstik45
November 3, 2006, 11:42 PM
Well of course shot placement is key. But say you have rock-steady aim for an area in the typical "center of mass" or even the head...and all of the sudden, the adversary's big meaty arm gets in the way as you squeeze off the shot. Will your cartridge penetrate reliably in the "right spot" after having to pass through the limb? This is why anything or anybody deserving one shot deserves more. Accuracy is all well and good if the weapon platform used is good. Yes, a circular argument, I know. But some people seem to think that people stay still to get shot at. Only targets do that...although cleverly simulated ones don't.

Marshall
November 4, 2006, 12:43 AM
Well,

:D

I'll take the opposite road. In my opinion the .40S&W is what the 9mm and .45 ACP can't be separately. It's a terrific compromise between the two. It provides heavier weight bullet and more power than the 9mm and much more speed than the 45ACP yet still allows for good magazine capacity in todays autoloaders.

The XD is a good example to use. The XD-40 is a 12+1 autoloader that has better ergonomics, is easier to conceal and weighs less than the XD-45ACP but yet provides more power and shoots larger, heavier bullets and weighs no more than the XD-9.

People are constantly arguing 45ACP vs 9mm. Well, to get the advantages of both, you have to buy both guns but, even so, you still can only shoot one at a time so, you're stuck with a 9mm or a 45 ACP. With the 40S&W you have a great compromise between the good points of each of them, in one gun.

As anyone that reads here on THR knows, I am Browning/FN die hard. The BHP in 9mm is one of my favorite, if not my all time favorite handgun so, I am not a 9mm basher. I also think the 1911 is the 45ACP's wet dream. But, if I had to pick one gun to defend myself with, it would be a 13-14 round 40S&W shooter.

So there. :p

jkomp316
November 4, 2006, 12:54 AM
I am all for the .40 round. 10grains of blue dot behind a 150gr jacketed hollow point = 1285fps. IMHO that is way more potent then most 9 or 45 rounds. Thats close to .357 mag levels. Everyone who says .40 is inaccurate or a bad comprimise obvioulsy doesn't own one. Considering 100rds of .40 is $17 at walmart, I think thats proof enough of its popularity. The .45 and 9mm were designed over 100yrs ago. If they had the powder/techology we have now, back then... I doubt they would've concluded the same final results. I see .40 as a "what we have learned in the past 100 yrs" round. Best of both worlds.

possum
November 4, 2006, 03:47 AM
maybe the same people that say the .40cal isn't accurate are the same folks that don't shoot them. i know i have come along way in my handgun shooting abilities and i am very pleased with the accuracy i get out of my .40 handguns.

MachIVshooter
November 4, 2006, 04:21 AM
With the 40S&W you have a great compromise between the good points of each of them, in one gun.

Hybrid cars are a "compromise". They have neither the environmentally friendly characteristics of an purely electric automobile nor the power of a straight gas powered vehicle.

Sometimes compromises offer something good. Usually not.

BTW, the hybrid automobiles are not even close to delivering on promised fuel economy. They actually do worse on the highway than many straight gas-powered compacts.

Coronach
November 4, 2006, 05:22 AM
Sometimes compromises offer something good. Usually not.Everything is a compromise.

Mike

.357 magnum
November 4, 2006, 10:30 AM
I guess you have to shoot the .40 to understand. It does require practice. Compared to the .45 it is harder too learn to shoot accurately It is a faster caliber then the .45 and has some kick butt self defense choices in cartridges as the .45 does. You have to really be picky about the self defense ammo in a 9mm. To me the 9mm is a dying round. Finally shot one at the range last week. Although I am not bashing the 9mm, it did not have the punch of a .40 or .45 Now I no why I am strictly .40 and .45 person! I am getting 100 rounds of winchester FMJ for 17.78 at Wal-mart. So price is good also. The .40 is very popular with LE and the .45 with special ops, swat teams etc. The 9mm has lost most of its popularity with U.S. LE. Honestly I can see why. If you have a better man-stopper at your disposal why not use it? I have 15 round mags on my 24/7 .40's with one in the chamber. Even my .45's are the Springfield XD with 13 in the mag one in the chamber. This makes for fun target practice and peace of mind if you need them for self-defense.

The Best to all!

Blacklabman
November 4, 2006, 11:31 AM
For USPSA and IDPA there is the 9mm.
In Non PF Divisions, the 9mm is dirt cheap to use.

For SD and CCW there is the 10mm.

For handgun hunting(deer,hog), there is the 10mm.

10mm practice(ball) is only $12 to $19 a box(depending on maker).

The price of Quality 10mm JHP's is no more than the cost of .45ACP's.
But to be honest.
Cost is NOT an issue, when talking about the lives of my family, and my life.


I really do not care, what the Police carry. I only care about, what works for me.

I tried the .40 once, by owning a G23 and a P229. I did not like the round, and will not own anything with .40S&W on it in the future.

Marshall
November 4, 2006, 01:19 PM
Quote:
Sometimes compromises offer something good. Usually not.

Everything is a compromise.

Mike

+1


For SD and CCW there is the 10mm.

Maybe if gun companies actually agreed with you and all of them offered their models in 10mm, I would be a 10mm fan. But, they don't.

jkomp316
November 4, 2006, 08:58 PM
Wasn't it concluded that a full power 10mm was overkill for stopping people? Hence the .40, a 10mm with less powder behind it. When I load up range rounds for my .40, I put even less powder behind it. So why would I need a 10mm? If someone wants to deer hunt with thier glock?

jlh26oo
November 4, 2006, 11:38 PM
Wasn't it concluded that a full power 10mm was overkill for stopping people? Hence the .40, a 10mm with less powder behind it. When I load up range rounds for my .40, I put even less powder behind it. So why would I need a 10mm? If someone wants to deer hunt with thier glock?I don't think you can say "concluded" by any means. I like overkill, but I think what you are referring to is that some are of the position that since 10mm and .40sw share a few of the same bullets, that there is a velocity threshold at which the bullets start working, and additional velocity does not add anything significant. I don't necessarily agree with that, but I'd just assume have a .40sw as a 10mm in lower weight bullets. I see the advantage of the 200 gr DT stuff in 10mm. Some of that is penetrating as deep and expanding as wide as .45acp. If it were a little cheaper and/or alot more available, I'd look hard at 10mm.

kengrubb
November 5, 2006, 06:17 AM
Wasn't it concluded that a full power 10mm was overkill for stopping people?
Full power 10mm is a real bear to shoot. The load the FBI developed was termed the 10mm Lite (among other things). Someone got the bright idea to make a shorter case for a smaller gun with the same performance as the FBI 10mm Lite, and the .40 S&W was born.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_9_51/ai_n14816182
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf

jkomp316
November 5, 2006, 01:58 PM
I was told they wanted a lower power 10mm because of penetration/liability issues.

MachIVshooter
November 5, 2006, 02:24 PM
I was told they wanted a lower power 10mm because of penetration/liability issues.

You were told wrong.

If you enjoyed reading about ".40 S&W the bullet of the new millenium" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!