9mm is cheaper & performs well, 45 is more proven, why all the agencies going 40S&W??


PDA






JLStorm
August 23, 2007, 01:57 PM
I know the 9mm vs 40 vs 45 debate has gone on again and again. I have searched and I have read the internet reports, the FBI reports, and quite a few articles. Basically I have found that if you want a reason one round is better than another there is some "expert" out there that has published something that will agree with you. However, the majority of what I read is:


9mm is cheaper to shoot than 40 and 40 is cheaper than 45
The wound ballistics of 9mm +P in JHP are almost identical to 40 in JHP given adequate expansion and VERY close to 45
45 trumps 9mm in battle because NATO allows only FMJ which does not apply to LE or private citizen use of weapons since they both generally carry JHP in most states.
If you can control the recoil of 40, you can probably control the recoil of 45, however it seems that it doesnt always work the other way around.
9mm has less recoil than 40 or 45 in factory ammunition even +p+
9mm offers more rounds than 40 or 45, 40 offers more rounds than 45 in the same size magazines.

So given the above information I can say with some confidence that most agencies didnt move to 40 from 9mm because it was cheaper, or because it offers more expansion under optimal conditions. 40 doesnt offer substantially less recoil than 45, but it is always cheaper. The only reason I can figure the huge switch from 9mm to 40S&W is because if conditions are not optimal, and material gets in the way between the shooter and the target, it will achieve optimal expansion more often than 9mm, how much more often I am not sure. 45 offers more consistent expansion and if there is no expansion makes bigger holes than 40 and 9mm, but at a sacrifice of round count and higher expense.

Given all that info, is the only reason LE agencies are going to 40 from 9mm to achieve more consistent expansion, and the only reason they are not going to 45 is because of expense and less rounds per magazine?

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm is cheaper & performs well, 45 is more proven, why all the agencies going 40S&W??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
steveracer
August 23, 2007, 01:59 PM
I have been asking this question for years.

Soybomb
August 23, 2007, 02:01 PM
What makes you think the person making the decision is doing it based on something logical like expansion and penetration? :) Not everyone is knowledable about such things. Last I looked the 5 largest police departments in the US issue 9mm weapons and account for 10% of all police in the US. Don't think 9mm is gone by any means.

gtmtnbiker98
August 23, 2007, 02:06 PM
What makes you think that smaller agencies aren't just following a marketing trend? The 80's it was the .38 and .357 Mag, the 90's mostly 9mm, the early 00's it's the .40, and now, you can witness the .357 Sig and .45 ACP making enrodes into the market (yes, the .45 ACP is coming back into favor). It varies based upon marketing hype if you ask me. My agency fell for the hype and purchased the Sig P229 in .357 Sig and now finds themselves in a situation where they can no longer provide monthly practice ammuntion based upon ammunition cost.

I've gotten to the point of recommending the purchase of the .40 S&W barrel and convert the pistols to a cheaper caliber - after all, it's a factory supported transition so no liability will occur.

You can turn this into a caliber war quite easily with this thread, but I'm sure we can all agree that modern ammunition is quite lethal and a well placed .22 shot to the head will kill you quicker then a .500 S&W Mag to the leg... Let the debate begin.

JLStorm
August 23, 2007, 02:14 PM
I really dont want to turn it into a caliber war, we have a TON of those. I just find that so many people carry what the big agencies carry, which must be a HUGE selling point for the gun manufacturers. I also find that many carry what the big agencies use assuming its the latest and greatest, which it may or may not be. I am only interested in why the agencies themselves are making the switch.

mavracer
August 23, 2007, 02:16 PM
simple Marketing
40 S&W is the answer to a non existant question.

for every reason you can come up with that the 40 is better than the 9mm the same is true why the 45 is better than th 40
likewise for every reason you can say the 40 is better than the 45 the same can be said about the 9mm being better than the 40.
and a 10mm is better than a 40 just cause it is.
so the only reason an agency would go to a 40, when three better rounds exist, is marketing.

Mad Magyar
August 23, 2007, 02:16 PM
Last I looked the 5 largest police departments in the US issue 9mm weapons and account for 10% of all police in the US.
Let's call a "spade a spade". The real reason is that many of these LEO's CANNOT qualify with a .45acp. Many sources for this if you need proof, M. Ayoob for one...A .40SW is about the limit, but the 9mm really makes it easier...If you cannot control a weapon, forget about it......
Cost, penetration; just incidentals to the underlying problem....:rolleyes:To use Ayoob again, most LEO's are not gun aficionados like you find on the forum. They fire their weapons as about often for requalification and that's about it....:eek:

gtmtnbiker98
August 23, 2007, 02:19 PM
I agree Mad Magyar! You have to fit the weapon to a wide array of hand sizes and shooting abilities. The .45 ACP can be a hand full to the inexperienced but should not be a deciding factor but it often times is.

GTSteve03
August 23, 2007, 02:24 PM
any sources for this if you need proof, M. Ayoob for one...A .40SW is about the limit, but the 9mm really makes it easier...If you cannot control a weapon, forget about it......
My own personal experience was that the 45 was easier to shoot than the 40 and almost as easy as the 9. Less snappy. I also shot it the best.

I sometimes kick myself for selling my 45 but ammo is twice as expensive as 9 and I need all the practice I can get. :rolleyes:

JLStorm
August 23, 2007, 02:27 PM
I so often read from people quite experienced with both 45 and 40 that 45 is easier to control on follow up shots due to its slow rolling recoil vs 40's quick snappy recoil. More often than not it seems from what I have read 40 is a bit harder to control in multiple shot scenarios than 45, which is why I dont understand the ability to control 40 but not 45. Maybe I am wrong, please someone correct me if that is the case.

Tom Servo
August 23, 2007, 02:30 PM
To use Ayoob again, most LEO's are not gun aficionados like you find on the forum. They fire their weapons as about often for requalification and that's about it....
I work in a range, and I can second that.

The plain fact is, the agents in the Miami shootout went into a fight in which they were outmatched. They rushed in like Rambo, then got boxed in by an adversary they couldn't match, and it was too late.

Sure, ordnance had something to do with it (pistol vs. rifle: GO!), but caliber did not. Don't forget that Morales put an end to things with a snubnose.

Rather than acknowledge poor marksmanship and tactics, the FBI pinned the blame on the "meager" 9mm. The bullet in question (the one that stopped just short of Platt's heart) did its job, and no other load available at the time would have done better. Not the .45, not the .38, not even the .40. The round hit resistance at several points (window and several bones), and it slowed and expanded, which is just what it was designed to do.

So, they tried the 10mm (which, in Norma loads is a .41 Mag), and there were problems with recoil and wear on the weapons. No good. They tried taking out powder and shortening the case, and they ended up with a round that was controllable in untrained hands.

That said, the .40 isn't very much fun to shoot. You've got a really highly pressurized round with a snappy recoil impulse that doesn't really shine in terms of accuracy.

Still, folks could tell their supervisors, "it's better than a nine...it's ONE MILLIMETER bigger! And it's not as hard to shoot as that pesky .45!"

Of course, I'm not alone in pointing out that the .45 is MUCH more comfortable than the .40 to shoot. The .40 appears to be proving itself well on the streets, but there's nothing I can do with it that I can't do just as well with any other service caliber.

My biggest concern is with new shooters. As I've mentioned, the .40 is really snappy, especially in smaller guns (I love Magnums, but cannot shoot a G27). Everybody's heard of the .40, and that's what they want for a first gun.

Well, it works, but if it's not pleasant to shoot, they're not going to practice as much as they should, and any advantage is lost. I spend alot of time steering them towards the 9mm or .45.

Scorpiusdeus
August 23, 2007, 03:21 PM
The .40 is more fun to shoot, more accurate, and a better stopper than the .45 or 9mm.

JLStorm
August 23, 2007, 03:31 PM
The .40 is more fun to shoot, more accurate, and a better stopper than the .45 or 9mm.

Please dont try to start a caliber war out of this. I doubt the Agencies picked 40 because it was "more fun" and I havent read anything that states it is more accurate at normal distances.

GTSteve03
August 23, 2007, 03:36 PM
The .40 is more fun to shoot, more accurate, and a better stopper than the .45 or 9mm.
Actually wrong on all 3 counts, but we'll give you the first one since it's opinion only. ;)

W.E.G.
August 23, 2007, 03:38 PM
The .40 caliber Glock frame has the EXACT same external dimensions as the 9mm version.

15 rounds of ammo that does 99.863% of what .45 ACP does, and without the added grip-girth that exists in .45 ACP pistols of similar capacity. What's not to like?

The .40 caliber Glock is the finest "rack-grade" autoloader ever made for folks who want to carry a full-size, major-caliber pistol. I objected, criticized and resisted this fact for SEVENTEEN YEARS! Flame me until 2024.

Oh, and don't shoot "reloads" or non-jacketed lead bullets in a Glock - unless you want to be this guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vceh44UK-8I

cpttango30
August 23, 2007, 03:48 PM
I think in part it has to do with feel good numbers. Many older men have handled a 1911 in 45acp. But in a lighter weight pistol it could be a bear with them nice 230gr hardball loads. the 9mm is a small round that looks week which it is not esp with todays bullets. So to make some people feel better they went with a 40 because having a 4 it makes you think it is a lot bigger when it is not and it fits in a 9mm frame there for offering men with small hands and women a Big gun to rival the real men shooting a 45.

It is all baised on fell good politics.

GunTech
August 23, 2007, 03:56 PM
WEG hit the nail on the head. The 40 can be built on the same frame size as the 9mm, the 45 cannot. The 45acp, while an outstanding round, is almost 100 years old and could be redesigned to make smaller, equivalent round a la 45 gap that would fit in a smaller package, but the reality is that with modern bullets neither the 40 or 45 offers a significant advantage over the 9mm. Studies like the ones conducted by Marshall et al have pretty much been shown to be invalid.

With non-expanding bullets, 45acp trump all others.

Ghost Tracker
August 23, 2007, 04:04 PM
Police Departments now regularly deal with applicants (and eventually rookies) who, unlike past generations, have NEVER fired a gun, ANY gun, before their first Firearm Orientation Class during Police Training. Departments are also dealing (under legal & cultural pressure) with an ever-increasing number of female officers. Hand size, physical strength and previous firearm experience all attribute to a now-required "sensitivity" on the part of the Department to their officers who are required to CARRY guns but are unable to QUALIFY with large .45 acp autoloaders. It's the same issue the FBI had when they wanted to issue 10mm pistols. Female agents filed lawsuit after lawsuit claiming that a 10mm qualification requirement was "discriminatory" because the weight & recoil was more easily handled by a male agent!

The .40 S&W offered a compromise. Better stopping results than the 9mm, higher mag capacity than the .45, lighter recoil than the 10mm, in frame sizes that allowed smaller hands to more easily operate. And, since Bean Counters love the idea of universal standards for $$$ saving's sake. And the Legal Department enjoys not being sued by every disgrundled, small-handed officer who fails to qualify. The .40 S&W is the current pellet of choice.

Political power plays a much bigger role in Equipment Selection than does the Stopping Power of the caliber (OR the well-earned experience & opinions of veteran Street Cops). BUT, if statistics & ballistics are to be believed, the .40 S&W does its required job quite well.

mavracer
August 23, 2007, 04:19 PM
The .40 caliber Glock frame has the EXACT same external dimensions as the 9mm version
15 rounds of ammo that does 99.863% of what .45 ACP does, and without the added grip-girth that exists in .45 ACP pistols of similar capacity. What's not to like?
but you had 19 rounds that do 99.863% of what 40 S&W does in the same size gun.seams silly you would not prefer a 9.I can go on.

Coronach
August 23, 2007, 04:20 PM
PDs are going to the .40 because it is an excellent compromise between capacity, shootability (especially crucial for officers with small hands) and stopping power. Like most excellent compromises, it makes everyone mad. That's how you know it's good. ;)

Marketing and follow-the-leader might influence some departments, especially smaller ones, but most will do ballistics testing and make up their own minds as to what they want, then the pencilnecks get to decide if the PD can get what it requests.

FWIW, I prefer 9mm, but that's just me.

Mike

mavracer
August 23, 2007, 04:23 PM
WEG hit the nail on the head. The 40 can be built on the same frame size as the 9mm.but the reality is that with modern bullets neither the 40 or 45 offers a significant advantage over the 9mm.
GunTech do you work in advertizing?
It can be built on the same size frame with no significant advantage.wow I couldn't have said it better

Docgmt
August 23, 2007, 04:24 PM
Yes I am old. I have fired a Marine issue 1911 Colt 45 and I own a .357, 9mm and a .40 and for all around CCW and shooting at the range the 40 wins.:) Tighter groups and easier to handle are the two main reasons for picking the 40 over the others, 15 round capacity is a bonus over the compact 9mm with 10.

GunTech
August 23, 2007, 04:31 PM
40 over 45 because the 40 can be built on a 9mm frame size. That the reason many agencies picked the 40. The 45 has a certain following, but most agents just don't care. When the agency my wife works for looked at a replacement, the two catridges they compared were 40 and 357 sig. They wanted a new pistol that was as close to the issue P226 as possible. Because 45 would have required a larger pistol, and might have too much recoil for some shooters, it wasn't considered. 40 won the day because that's what most other federal agencies were adopting.

My personal take is that neither 40 or 45 offer much over the 9mm. I like the 45 because I like the 1911 platform. I have a G26 because I happened to get a super good deal on 10,000 rounds of 40 S&W and I needed something to shoot it in.

I consider any handgun a compromize and borderline effective. It's only a compormise tool with which to fight your way to a rifle.

Scorpiusdeus
August 23, 2007, 04:50 PM
Actually wrong on all 3 counts, but we'll give you the first one since it's opinion only. I got this from the same unbiased scientific study everyone else is using... ;)

Bobo
August 23, 2007, 05:00 PM
I believe that part of the reason that much of law enforcement has gone with .40 is it’s ability to puncture auto glass and doors and still proceed to and damage a human target with a fairly large bullet diameter.

The 9-mm can do similar puncturing, but has a considerably smaller bullet diameter.

The .45 has the large diameter, but lacks the glass/door puncturing capabilities.

The .40 is a good compromise. For law enforcement this may be quite important, but for civilians less so.

.357 magnum
August 23, 2007, 05:27 PM
The switch to the .40 has mostly been for its ability to penetrate common barrier's and still put down the perp. The .40 also has a wide variety of ammo available that works quite well. Personally I use all three calibers. The .40 is the one I am the least accurate with. [although with practice I have gotten quite accurate] The .45 is my favorite, because I am the most accurate with it and I trust it a little more over the 9mm to stop the threat. I would not feel under gunned with my 9mm's since I use 124 gr +P ammo. I just feel those big holes will always get the job done:evil:. That being said, with todays bullet technology and higher mag capacities all three are quite adequate for the job:).

The Best to All!

Frank

msg usa
August 23, 2007, 07:16 PM
.40 caliber.......its whats for dinner....!

CWL
August 23, 2007, 07:26 PM
In the '80's the FBI conducted bullet studies after the Miami Shootout in order to discover why properly-deployed .38spcl and 9mm bullets did not end the gunfight that resulted in the deaths of 2 and wounding of 5 of their Agents. I believe that it was the first serious study of bullet performance.

End results was that FBI adopted 10mm bullets, but that soon got downgraded to the .40S&W because the 10mm was too powerful for some to handle. Many LE Agendies/Depts. followed because they believed in the FBI report. It is not that uncommon for any Agency/Dept. to automatically adopt what the FBI chooses.

Non-M1911 .45ACP guns were pretty rare during the late 1980s and early 1990s -these did not make a real comeback until after the high-capacity magazine ban took place.

harbinger_j
August 23, 2007, 11:14 PM
I think it is simple sales and marketing work.
Let's pretend I am selling and you are buying for the police:

Me: You could go with the 9mm which is what many consider is the minimum caliber for providing adequate stopping power. We also offer a .45 and the new .40 S&W.

You: Which one is the best choice, the lives of our police is our #1 priority.

Me: If it were up to me I'd go with the .45 a bigger bullet is going to make a bigger hole, but it can be expensive.

You: We need to keep our costs down, the budget is tight this year.

Me: Well you can always get the least expensive option: the 9mm.

You: I think we could go with the .40 S&W at least it is bigger than the 9mm.

Me: Here is the contract just sign on the dotted line.

It is easy to sell the mid-point product when people are buying a life-saving device and remember they are spending your money not their own.

ceetee
August 24, 2007, 01:37 PM
Don't forget the fact that police unions have a lot of say in what equipment their members use. The unions were the main reason NYPD switched from .38 revolvers to Glocks. The unions are often quick to jump on the latest fad, "for the good of the officers". In reality, they have to have some issue to fight for, or their members start wondering why they have to keep having dues pulled out of their check every week.

brentfoto
August 24, 2007, 01:58 PM
I have no idea why any particular department chose .40 over the 9mm, 10mm or 45ACP. I would speculate, though, that it provided a promise of greater performance/stopping power than the 9mm yet not as limited re magazine and less recoil than the .45. 10mm being a bit much for FBI, the .40 was indeed struck as a compromise round between the 9mm and the 10mm as it is precisely 10mm in diameter.

I'm curious to know which major police agency first announced that it was switching to .40?

.357 magnum
August 24, 2007, 07:04 PM
Great Question.:) I think it may have been the FBI. As far as a regular police agency, I do not know. It would be interesting to find out. Hopefully someone knows. I will research it.

The Best to you and Yours!

Frank

chieftain
August 24, 2007, 07:49 PM
Studies like the ones conducted by Marshall et al have pretty much been shown to be invalid.

With non-expanding bullets, 45acp trump all others.

Oh? They proved Marshall etal were not scientific. All the jello murderers proved is that they have the best bullets for murdering Innocent blocks of jello. On the street, returns have shown Marshall wasn't that wrong.

IN the end both Fackler and Marshall were very close. Once Fackler and company proved that it took longer to kill some one than to stop them, they went away. Amazing.

Both sides had something to add to the study. The Jello murderers, were abusive in their treatment of Marshall, who did not purport his work to be science. Such were the ego's involved. The head jello murderer admitted his work only covered approximately 50% of the stopping power question.

AS to non-expanding bullets, At least the 9mm's will penetrate. No one can count on a 45 getting through. Two of the high priests of the 45 Cooper and Taylor both admitted the poor penetration capability of the 445acp.

Yes I am old. I have fired a Marine issue 1911 Colt 45 and I own a .357, 9mm and a .40 and for all around CCW and shooting at the range the 40 wins.

I am old too. I have fought with the 1911 Colt 45 and the S&W 38spl. Found the 38 to be more reliable, and normally penetrated better than the 45.

As to the 40 winning FOR YOU. ok for you, not for me. I prefer either 45 or 9mm. If I went for any of the new designer cartridges, I would probably op for the 357SIG. It is much closer to the round that I know to be the best. The 357Mag 125gr JSHP by Federal or Remington (full house, they did/do make an intermediate pressure option). NO agency changed from that cartridge due to lack of "stopping" power.

To many folks confuse killing power with stopping power. I don't want to die at the hands of someone I have killed.

The 45 has a certain following, but most agents just don't care.........……40 won the day because that's what most other federal agencies were adopting.

Not exactly an endorsement. Reinforces the concept of Bureaucratic "me to". "We chose this superior round because.............a bunch of others did."

My personal take is that neither 40 or 45 offer much over the 9mm. I like the 45 because I like the 1911 platform. I have a G26 because I happened to get a super good deal on 10,000 rounds of 40 S&W and I needed something to shoot it in.

What does the 40 or 45 offer over the 9mm? It ain't stopping power.

Best reason for a selection is the platform.

I hope you made an error. even 10,000 rounds of 40 S&W don't work so well out of a Glock 26. Either you bought a lot of 9mm or a Glock ?.

Any how. Religious beliefs in the stopping power of X round/caliber are BS. If anyone thinks the caliber chosen is going to win or lose the fight. You don't belong in any fight.

Mind set, ability, and tactics, are the most important elements in a fight.

As to a firearm, reliability is number 1 through 3. Platform fit to the individual is next. training with selected weapon, practice, and maintenance.

If caliber is still a question. I am not sure you understand the question.

For the record. As I write this, I am wearing a Colt Government in 45acp. I am about to go to dinner, I will be switching to one of my Hi Powers in 9mm.

go figure.

Fred

armed85
August 24, 2007, 09:01 PM
With comments like "with modern bullets, 9mm is..." and "with non expanding bullets, .45 ACP trump all others" I wonder if people know that .45 ACP has those "modern bullets" and +P pressures as well. Just a thought.

I prefer .45 ACP, but I'm issued an M9 for duty. I feel about the same with either a 9mm or a .45. If I knew a gun fight was about to happen, I'd rather have a rifle in my hands than a handgun. I really think the military should adopt a short barreled shotgun for "non combat" personnel, but I suppose I don't have enough rank to understand these decisions. Part of the reason the M4 carbine exists was to replace the M9 for certain personnel.

I chose .45 for the emotional value it has. The 1911 is a classic and so too is the round it was designed to fire. It's big. Maybe even too big. It's all American unlike the 9mm Luger. I barely have to try and I'm very accurate with a 1911 and the recoil is a nice "push" rather than the "snap" that a .40 S&W has.

Oh, and I'm 22. Not old and I prefer Colt 1911s and .45s over Glocks and other plastic pistols. I might not be tacticool, but I can put my 7 rounds on target better than most can put their 15.

We can argue about the plus or minus percentage point that the .40 S&W has over the 9mm Luger or the .45 ACP has over whatever else, but at the end of the day, a reliable shotgun, rifle, or carbine in a police officer's hands is going to do a lot more good than "upgrading" his or her 9mm to a .40 or .45.

The problems a police officer faces is a whole lot like what I face when I'm issued an M9. We rarely need a gun as we're not asking for a fight. The handgun is a defensive weapon and very limited in it's use.

When it comes to firearms, nothing the "higher ups" decide ever makes sense. This is true whether your uniform is camouflage or has a badge.

scubie02
August 24, 2007, 10:37 PM
the obvious answer, as already mentioned, is that the 40 balanced a round with more punch with the ability to still have high capacity.

People will say "but 9mm +P+ is JUST as affective!", which may well be true, but by the time you buy +P+ ammo, it is just as expensive or generally MORE so than 40 S&W, and less common to find on the shelf at the local store.

Personally, I own all three and like all three. I am a 1911 guy and most often carry a 45, so I am obviously a fan there. But with ammo prices going the way they are I find myself practicing with it less because 45 ammo is just so damned expensive these days. I have more 9mm stockpiled than anything else at this point. Obviously it is a pussycat to shoot. Even 40 is still fairly significantly less money than 45. All three are probably equally easy to find in stock--all very popular.

Recoil--I'd have to go with those who say the 45 is actually MORE pleasant to shoot than the 40 in this department, though this is probably subjective. I think it also has something to do with gun design as some soak up recoil better than others. Shoot them all in the same pistol and the opinion might change. The 40 is not unmanageable, though, and I'd just as soon shoot it as +p's out of an airweight j frame 38 or many 357's.

Bottom line, in my head I don't worry about any of them and figure they will all do the job. I will admit that when I'm walking the dog and thinking I might run into some large, toothy critter, I feel a bit better with the larger caliber guns. But for people, well, any hole's a bad hole for most people.

Oh, accuracy--I find that all three can be very accurate. I have pistols in all three calibers that can put them all in the 10 ring at 30 ft if I take my time and do my part.

sm
August 24, 2007, 10:44 PM
There was that time at Alphabet Agency Camp where the 10mm was the chosen Alphabet Agency Camp gun.

Just the gun did not fit all the campers very well, and therefore since the gun did not fit the campers well, they could not shoot it well.

So some of the Leaders of da camp said "How about making the ctg a bit less softer in recoil?
Others leaders said "My grandma what big eyes you have , sharp teeth too and isn't that gun a bit big and heavy to be shooting a diluted 10mm?

So Hansel & Gretal show up with a brand new plan with a .40cal Shorter&Weaker.
They passed out Kool-Aid and got all sorts of low bids, and intraweb debates going on.

If we will tout it - they will buy it - especially if we give great trade ins, and super prices for these poorer cased Shorter&Weaker, because everybody else will want what Cops want!

Hollywood got in on the act, I mean getting paid to show a dancing Pepsi can worked so well, why not a Shorter&Weaker?

Alphabet Agency Camp, sorta shut up, as they were enjoying the Kool-Aid and extra cookies for Camp leader training days.

Leastwise that was the story I was told anywho. ;)

rocketfish
August 24, 2007, 10:58 PM
Guys, you are all wrong.

The LE agencies went to the .40 because they "are the only ones professional enough" to have it!:evil:

finalcut
August 25, 2007, 02:18 AM
A lot of you guys don't know what you're talking about. .
I have .45 - .40 - .44mag... and I like them all.
.40 has advantages over .45 & 9mm, and it has disadvantages - it all boils down to more choice to suite personal preference.

I like .40 over 9mm and .45 for a few simple reasons:
1- It has more stopping power than 9mm ( they are not the same ).
Fact - case studies show that BGs who get shot with .40 shoot back less than they do when shot with 9mm. When they get shot with 9mm they are often able to endure multiple hits and kill police with returned fire. Not so when they are shot with .40 as case studies show that optimum .40 cal provides one-stop shots in the mid to high 90%
2- It has better penetration than .45 and there are many situations when extra penetration is a very good thing.
3- It is cheaper than .45
4- You can fit more rounds in a gun than .45

For me it's got more of the best of both worlds with little compromise, and marketing had nothing to do with it.

Soybomb
August 25, 2007, 04:29 AM
Fact - case studies show that BGs who get shot with .40 shoot back less than they do when shot with 9mm. When they get shot with 9mm they are often able to endure multiple hits and kill police with returned fire. Not so when they are shot with .40 as case studies show that optimum .40 cal provides one-stop shots in the mid to high 90%
Can you cite a source? When someone starts talking "one stop shots" I always assume that they're talking about M&S data. It isn't statistically valid for a large number of reasons.

chieftain
August 25, 2007, 04:44 AM
1- It has more stopping power than 9mm ( they are not the same ).
Fact - case studies show that BGs who get shot with .40 shoot back less than they do when shot with 9mm. When they get shot with 9mm they are often able to endure multiple hits and kill police with returned fire. Not so when they are shot with .40 as case studies show that optimum .40 cal provides one-stop shots in the mid to high 90%



Repeat what Soybomb said:

Where is your source for that outlandish statement? I know of no agency or dept stating those facts.

Please, have another cup of kool aid and tell us where these "FACTS" come from. Or did the stork bring them?

Go figure.

Fred

BobHAJ
August 25, 2007, 04:51 AM
There is only a couple reasons.
1. Standardize on a single caliber
2. Women can't handle a .45

finalcut
August 25, 2007, 05:30 AM
Where is your source for that outlandish statement? I know of no agency or dept stating those facts.
Please, have another cup of kool aid and tell us where these "FACTS" come from. Or did the stork bring them?

Well it looks like they forgot to fax you their reports - you better get right on that : )

There's plenty of data out there. I'm sure you'll find reasons not to like any of it - but here is a neat chart from handloads.com
http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=0&Weight=All

Then there is a great book called "Combat Hand gunnery" by Massad Ayoob that has a nice section on loads covering some history & studies... that clearly show s&w .40 being a more powerful load. In fact he says that the reports from Nashville say that the performance of the Winchester Taloned Hollow-point in .40 is extraordinary - a description that I doubt is used by professionals when talking about 9mm.

Last but not least is common sense. We all know the story of why the FBI went to 10mm after getting shot up by the BGs who were not dropping dead fast enough when taking multiple hits with 9mm and then the new 10mm went to .40 because 10mm was to powerful for the feds to carry. Have you heard reports of BGs taking multiple hits with .40 on the same scale and proving as ineffective? No you have not. Quite the opposite. Law enforcement has numerous reports of .40 working great. There again "Combat Hand gunnery" by Massad Ayoob shares some of these testimonies.

The .40 is also known to have match-grade accuracy when loaded with EXP by Black Hills according to Massad.

Anyhow - my statement is not outlandish. Do your own homework. 9mm is said to be an ok round ( but not IMO ), but the .40 is more powerful weather you like it or not. I think it's outlandish to think otherwise, but what ever. I really don't care that much - to each his own - it's not like I own stock in S&W .40
I just think that when someone asks a question about some thing like this the answers givin should be more genuine. A lot of folks out there want to give .40 cal a bad wrap for some funky reason and in doing so lay down a lot of bias opinion. I'm not saying that .40 is WAY WAY WAY better than 9mm - but it is notably better, and there is plenty of data out there to back it up.
I wouldn't be surprised if our Military started to carry .40 more than .45 due to it's better penetration & sufficient stopping power. Wouldn't that be something.

By the way - I don't like Kool-Aid, I'm more of a coffee drinker.

mavracer
August 25, 2007, 06:51 AM
I like .40 over 9mm and .45 for a few simple reasons:
1- It has more stopping power than 9mm ( they are not the same ).
Fact - case studies show that BGs who get shot with .40 shoot back less than they do when shot with 9mm. When they get shot with 9mm they are often able to endure multiple hits and kill police with returned fire. Not so when they are shot with .40 as case studies show that optimum .40 cal provides one-stop shots in the mid to high 90%
2- It has better penetration than .45 and there are many situations when extra penetration is a very good thing.
3- It is cheaper than .45
4- You can fit more rounds in a gun than .45

I like 9mm and 45 over 40 S&W for a few simple reasons:
1- .45 has more stopping power than 40 ( they are not the same ).
Fact - case studies show that BGs who get shot with 45 shoot back less than they do when shot with 40. When they get shot with 40 they are often able to endure multiple hits and kill police with returned fire. Not so when they are shot with .45 as case studies show that optimum .45 cal provides one-stop shots in the mid to high 90%
2- 9mm has better penetration than .40 and there are many situations when extra penetration is a very good thing.
3- 9mm is cheaper than .40
4- You can fit more 9mm rounds in a gun than .40

I CAN GO ON FOREVER

ps they are both easier to control

mavracer
August 25, 2007, 07:16 AM
from your own data (wich BTW is from marshall and sanow)
45=96% > 40=94% > 9mm=91% and
in a 1911
9mm=10 rounds > 40=9 rounds > 45=8 rounds
in a glock its
17 > 15 > 13 respectivly

its marketing

the fotay is a compramise and to quote HK in a world of compramise some don't

if your 40 makes you feal warm and fuzzy thats great.But the OP asked why and why is marketing of an inferior product of the 10mm which was a knee jerk reaction to the miami shootout.
the bottom line is all handgun rounds are a comprimise,if you look at your chart even the mighty .308 is not 100%.the only way a COM (chest shot) is going to incapasitate the BG is by getting their blood pressure to 0 because you cant interupt the central nervous system above the third vertabrae with a chest shot.
IMHO the majority of one shot stops have nothing to do with caliber it has to do with "OMG they shot me I don't want them to do that again" the other ones that don't care the ones you have to STOP you either better figure out somthing to do while their BP drops or figure out how to interupt their CNS.
BTW if your reliaint on the weapon to stop BG on it caliber your in a bad state of mind.training, tactics and practice will save your life.
situation avoidance,escape,and only when no other option,
The ability to draw from concealment and put X rounds COM fast will be required to save your life,the caliber gun you have likely won't matter.

scubie02
August 25, 2007, 09:34 AM
he just asked why agencies changed, not how effective the rounds are vs each other and such--no reason to get too worked up...

hell, I carried 38's for years and still sometimes carry a j frame in 38 or 32 H&R if clothing or circumstance call for it--9's or 40's or 45's all seem pretty peppy by comparison haha, but I don't worry too much the j frame's ammo won't do the job. I remember one old timer I used to know stepping UP to 38 special after years of carrying various wheelguns 32's and such (he even had one of those pinfire models)

armed85
August 25, 2007, 09:43 AM
There is only a couple reasons.
1. Standardize on a single caliber
2. Women can't handle a .45

Where are you folks getting the idea that .45 ACP kicks like a mule? It's a low pressure round. It's not a 44 Magnum or a 454 Casull.

If you're talking about the grip size. Women with small hands have equal trouble with a double stack grip of a Glock or equivalent as they do with a single stack grip of a 1911. This is especially true for large double stack guns like the Beretta 92/M9.

Check this out:

http://www.womenandguns.com/archive/old0702issue/tacoma0802.html

http://www.womenandguns.com/archive/old0702issue/pix0702/B1.jpg

finalcut
August 25, 2007, 11:39 PM
I like 9mm and 45 over 40 S&W for a few simple reasons:
1- .45 has more stopping power than 40 ( they are not the same ).
Fact - case studies show that BGs who get shot with 45 shoot back less than they do when shot with 40. When they get shot with 40 they are often able to endure multiple hits and kill police with returned fire. Not so when they are shot with .45 as case studies show that optimum .45 cal provides one-stop shots in the mid to high 90%
2- 9mm has better penetration than .40 and there are many situations when extra penetration is a very good thing.
3- 9mm is cheaper than .40
4- You can fit more 9mm rounds in a gun than .40

I CAN GO ON FOREVER

ps they are both easier to control

Yes you can go on forever I'm sure. But you're using two loads combined to out-perform one.... I just like .40 cause I think it has the best of both worlds in one round.

Anyhow - what ever. I wouldn't want to be shot with any of them. The only reason I'm replying is you said my first statement that .40 is more powerful than 9mm was outlandish... But you win : ) 9mm is better than .40 & .40 is a stupid round that need not exist. I was wrong...

brownie0486
August 26, 2007, 12:25 AM
Let's call a "spade a spade". The real reason is that many of these LEO's CANNOT qualify with a .45acp.

Cite the study on this statement for us please.

BTW- your statement is not true, you'll not find ANY study to support your statement.

In fact, the forty produces more recoil impulse than a 45acp. If someone can shoot a 40S+W well, they can shoot the 45 better [ where recoil is concerned ].

MOST agencies have not considered the 45acp, nor tested that cartridge for possible consideration for their officers for many reasons, but one of them is not because the 45 is harder to shoot than the 40.

State and local agencies have always pretty much followed the feds lead in caliber choice. They went with the 10mm, then later the 40s+w as it was easier for most of their officers to control and shoot well [ many could not handle the 10mm recoil ].

Brownie

mavracer
August 26, 2007, 12:41 AM
Yes you can go on forever I'm sure. But you're using two loads combined to out-perform one.... I just like .40 cause I think it has the best of both worlds in one round.
go back and read my first post #6 in this thread.
yes the 40 works ok, I never said it doesn't.but come on the best of both worlds,hardly.muzzle blast and recoils more than .45 less capacity than 9mm.no the 10mm is the best of both worlds 180 gr @1300.
I'll paraphrase my friend rantingredneck everyone who thinks I can't hit them with 8 rounds of 45 line up to the right those who think 1 9mm COM won't stop them line up to the left.

yes the 40 works but it exists because a 115 silvertip did not stop platte in miami and the women FBI agents couldn't handel the 10mm so they emasculated it and poof smoke and mirrors a new great thing everybodys gotta have it cause nothing else will work anymore.NOT

chaim
August 26, 2007, 01:42 PM
I like them all, so I definately have no desire to go (where this easily can) into a knock down, drag out, "mine is better than yours"... All three calibers have advantages and disadvantages when compared with the others.

40 S&W is the answer to a non existant question.
I used to say the exact same thing, now it is one of my favorite defensive calibers (when I'm in a carry state and not carrying a revolver it is my #1 caliber, while I usually use .45ACP for home defense).

While I can't really say why so many police agencies went with it, here are my reasons for my changeover:

-It has comparable power to the .45ACP. Depending upon what measure you use (muzzle energy, Taylor Index, the discredited "one shot stops," etc.) it comes out nearly equal to or even slightly above similar .45ACP power levels.

-It can be chambered in smaller framed weapons than the .45ACP and still hold more rounds.

-While the 9mm can hold more rounds, it isn't as powerful. I think it is enough (and in the smallest guns in these calibers I'd go with the lower recoiling 9mm), but the extra gain in the .40 is quite reassuring.

-Related to the last point, while you can get similar performance between all three with the right ammo choice (which negates any price benefit of the 9mm BTW since the really good 9mm ammo costs the same as the best ammo in the other 2), ammo selection is particularly important in 9mm. There are some great performers in 9mm defensive JHPs but there are some that are quite marginal as well. With .40S&W out of any common barrel size, and .45ACP in standard (4+") barrel sizes, even the most marginal defensive JHPs have pretty decent performance. In a short barrel .45ACP loses this advantage, but .40S&W keeps it, so in a short barrel I definately choose .40S&W over even .45ACP.

-While I do think the .40S&W recoil is less comfortable than either 9mm or .45ACP it is only marginally less comfortable. In any but the smallest guns it is chambered in, it is comfortable to shoot (in a service sized pistol it is quite comfortable). However, in a pocket, or near pocket, sized gun (like the Kahr PM series) I would prefer a 9mm.

For military and police use, there are two other advantages I see (though not concerns for me):
-Military: The military can only use FMJ. The 9mm is quite a marginal caliber without expanding bullets. The .40S&W isn't as big as the .45ACP, but it is big enough that its performance with FMJ isn't bad, and coupled with the next advantage I think it is even a good choice for the military (the Coast Guard apparently agrees since they went with the SIG 229 I believe, it may have been the 226, in .40S&W).
-Hard barrier penetration (walls, doors, car doors, windows): The higher velocity rounds (9mm and .40S&W) have a significant advantage in this area over the .45ACP. The 9mm has a disadvantage for military use due to no JHP the .45ACP has a disadvantage in hard barrier penetration, while the .40S&W is a nice compromise giving a larger diameter (better for FMJ only) and hard barrier penetration.


So, for all of us the .40 gives performance comparable to the .45ACP in smaller guns (better for small hands) and higher capacity. It gives capacity comparable to 9mm in the same sized guns with more power. It makes ammo selection a bit more simple than 9mm or even .45ACP if your gun has shorter than a 4" barrel (you can buy what is on sale if you are on a budget). For police and military use it gives 9mm-like barrier penetration with .45ACP-like power, and for the military it has a larger diameter than 9mm which is very important since they can't use JHPs. The cost is slightly less pleasant recoil, but it isn't bad or outside the capabilities of most shooters (especially in full-sized service pistols or the next size down, like the 229).

gudel
August 26, 2007, 01:53 PM
another caliber war. What the hell, buy them all, I did.

gudel
August 26, 2007, 01:54 PM
ah Double post

mavracer
August 26, 2007, 02:53 PM
I like them all, so I definately have no desire to go (where this easily can) into a knock down, drag out, "mine is better than yours"... All three calibers have advantages and disadvantages when compared with the others.
and then you did here are my reasons for my changeover:


With .40S&W out of any common barrel size, and .45ACP in standard (4+") barrel sizes, even the most marginal defensive JHPs have pretty decent performance. In a short barrel .45ACP loses this advantage, but .40S&W keeps it, so in a short barrel I definately choose .40S&W over even .45ACP.
marketing got you again, do you have any evidence,didn't think so. You herd it some where and now you are repeteing it as fact.male bovine fecal matter
I'v chronoed doubletaps 230 golddot from my amt backup 3" ported Bbl. 875 fps. 45s got more oomp no matter what Bbl length.its simple physics 45 has more surface area for pressure to work on.
-Hard barrier penetration (walls, doors, car doors, windows): The higher velocity rounds (9mm and .40S&W) have a significant advantage in this area over the .45ACP. The 9mm has a disadvantage for military use due to no JHP the .45ACP has a disadvantage in hard barrier penetration, while the .40S&W is a nice compromise giving a larger diameter (better for FMJ only) and hard barrier penetration.
actually barrier penetration is better with the bigger bullets the likeley hood of bullet deflection due to angles of the barrier is greater.bullet design has probly played a bigger roll in the perpitation of this misinformation.If you ever notice most 9mm and 45 fmj are round nose which also leads to deflection.most 40 fmj are truncated cone.the 40 has benafited from 80 years of bullet gun developement ie. all 40 JHP have been designed in the last 20 years. with modern performance ammo there is as much difference within each caliber than between them.
I have 9mm,38spcl,357mag,10mm,44 mag,45acp and 45 colt.give me a good reason I need a 40.

.357 magnum
August 26, 2007, 04:49 PM
After re-visiting this thread I just had to come back in and stick up for Finalcut. If any of you gentlemen think the 9mm is better then the .40 in stopping the BG, then you are living in a sheltered world. Also calling the .40 short and weak, is like saying the .45 is trumped by a .17 hmr. I own all three calibers. After much research, a year and a half ago I decided to get a .40 and learn to shoot it well. It was the hardest caliber of the three to learn to shoot well for me. But well worth it. Just go ask anyone in LE that uses the .40 everyday in the line of duty. You will find out real quick that the 9mm is not a better stopper then the .40! :eek:Their are so many very lethal rounds in the .40 cal, sometimes it is hard to name them all. In reality the .40 and .45 are much closer to each other in stopping power. I still prefer the .45 because I shoot it better. But if told me that five minutes from now 3 coked up BG were coming in my house and here ya go Frank-- your choice-- take your 9mm loaded with 18 rounds of 124gr +p or take your .40 loaded with 16 rounds of 180gr Ranger T. I would have to be the one High on coke to take the 9mm, I am taking the .40 every time! By the way I am 51 years old, so I learned about the .40 with no prejudice. When I was in LE I used a .357 Mag- Great Round- limited number of shots and follow-up shots were never that easy.

Have a Good Day Gentleman!

Frank

Ala Dan
August 26, 2007, 05:05 PM
I agree with the original poster "whole heartedly"; with the 9m/m and
.45 ACP (combined) probably more souls have been planted, than the
.40 S&W can ever catch up too~! The 9 for instance, shoots flatter
and faster than any .40 S&W; and the .45 ACP is currently enjoying
a rebirth from its out-standing performance over 'bout 80 years in the
U.S. military. Really, I see NO use for such other cartridges as the .40
S&W, 10 m/m, and .357 SIG. ;):D

I forgot too mention that the 9m/m (being a NATO round) is most likely
available virtually worldwide; so if we find ourselves fighting another
ugly war far from home, we probably will be able to find an ample supply
of ammo anywhere in the world.

STAGE 2
August 26, 2007, 05:42 PM
Just go ask anyone in LE that uses the .40 everyday in the line of duty. You will find out real quick that the 9mm is not a better stopper then the .40!

And how many LEO's have ever shot their gun while on duty. Out of that, how many have acually shot someone. Important things to know.


Their are so many very lethal rounds in the .40 cal, sometimes it is hard to name them all.

Because those pesky 9/45 rounds just aren't lethal.

mavracer
August 26, 2007, 05:45 PM
After re-visiting this thread I just had to come back in and stick up for Finalcut. If any of you gentlemen think the 9mm is better then the .40 in stopping the BG, then you are living in a sheltered world. Also calling the .40 short and weak, is like saying the .45 is trumped by a .17 hmr. I own all three calibers. After much research, a year and a half ago I decided to get a .40 and learn to shoot it well. It was the hardest caliber of the three to learn to shoot well for me. But well worth it. Just go ask anyone in LE that uses the .40 everyday in the line of duty. You will find out real quick that the 9mm is not a better stopper then the .40! Their are so many very lethal rounds in the .40 cal, sometimes it is hard to name them all. In reality the .40 and .45 are much closer to each other in stopping power. I still prefer the .45 because I shoot it better. But if told me that five minutes from now 3 coked up BG were coming in my house and here ya go Frank-- your choice-- take your 9mm loaded with 18 rounds of 124gr +p or take your .40 loaded with 16 rounds of 180gr Ranger T. I would have to be the one High on coke to take the 9mm, I am taking the .40 every time!
If any of you gentlemen think the .40 is better then the .45 in stopping the BG, then you are living in a sheltered world.But if told me that five minutes from now 3 coked up BG were coming in my house and here ya go Paul-- your choice-- take your 40 loaded with 16 rounds of 180gr ranger t or take your .45 loaded with 14 rounds of 230gr doubletap golddots. I would have to be the one High on coke to take the .40, I am taking the .45 every time except its in my holster an my ar15s in my hand !
the 40 is short & weak standing next to the 10mm

Lonestar49
August 26, 2007, 05:48 PM
...

The high middle ground?


LS

critrxdoc
August 26, 2007, 06:58 PM
Doubletap ballistics

9mm
Ballistics : 115gr @ Glock 19 velocity - 1395fps / 497 ft/lbs

.40
Ballistics : 135gr. @ 1375fps / 567 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)

You get 70 more FPE out of essentially the same size platform

brownie0486
August 26, 2007, 08:11 PM
Just go ask anyone in LE that uses the .40 everyday in the line of duty. You will find out real quick that the 9mm is not a better stopper then the .40!

This statement flies in the face of reality. In the first place, most cops don't know didly about loads or calibers. They carry what they are issued. Ask ANY officer? You'll get an opinion, no more or less.

Now to the remark that the 9mm doesn't stand up to the idea it is a better stopper, lets think about that statement for one minute-------

Does it have to be a better stopper than another round? Or does it only have to be a reliable stopper with the right load? The San Jose PD carries glock 17 9mm's for duty [ there are 1400+ officers on that dept ].

Less than two years ago, their 9mm glocks, stoked with 18 rds of Win Ranger 147 grain loads had stopped 9 for 9 with one shot on the streets there after they went to that load.

It doesn't have to be better than any other round, it onloy has to perform as expected, and if you use one of the better 9mm loads, it will suffice as well as any 40 or 45. Real street stats from the San Jose training officer who isn't guessing if some load works, but from real data they are experiencing on the streets.

Brownie

GaryArkansas
August 26, 2007, 09:23 PM
40 caliber is fashionable among big caliber guys and government purchasing agents. Glock also has a great marketing machine. They persuaded the ATF to classify their guns as double action, and they give sweetheart deals to procuring agencies. Although no longer state of the art, Glocks in 40 caliber are entrenched in the minds of purchasing agents.

Guys who grew up watching John Wayne movies have a soft spot in their hearts for 1911 pistols and big cowboy calibers. You know who they are, because they walk lopsided from carrying all that weight. Yeah, they look manly, I know. Tommy Lee Jones carries a Glock in the Fugitive movies, so that's a plus for the big caliber guys.

Cool guys (like me) who watched James Bond movies while growing up, KNOW that smaller calibers are the best. The girls like us cuz we wear tuxedos ALL THE TIME. Our little guns allow us the hold a martini and cigarette in one hand, while shooting the bad guy with our other hand. If we ruled the world, there would be a weight limit on bullets at 110 grains. We think 9mm is too big, but, in the spirit of friendliness, we can compromise.

finalcut
August 26, 2007, 11:06 PM
Mavracer - are you a teenager?

Bottom line.
All three rounds will get the job done with the right load in the right hands. What's wrong with a few options....

Anyhow - I'm outa here - this horse stinks like mavracer sauce

chieftain
August 26, 2007, 11:39 PM
Statement attributed to a SEAL officer.

"Two to the Chest one In the head, what difference does caliber make?"

That is the same SEAL's who have not seen any reason to lay down their SIG 9mm's. They have the HK 45acp in inventory, but none of them use it anymore per several SEAL friends of mine. 2 of them are retired from the Navy now and both carry SIG 228's only available in 9mm.

Once more. With feeling.

If you think caliber is the answer, you really don't understand the question.

Go figure.

Fred

JLStorm
August 27, 2007, 02:31 AM
Statement attributed to a SEAL officer.

"Two to the Chest one In the head, what difference does caliber make?"

That is the same SEAL's who have not seen any reason to lay down their SIG 9mm's. They have the HK 45acp in inventory, but none of them use it anymore per several SEAL friends of mine. 2 of them are retired from the Navy now and both carry SIG 228's only available in 9mm.

Once more. With feeling.

If you think caliber is the answer, you really don't understand the question.

Go figure.

Fred


I agree with you, but I dont think its a fair comparison. Most civilians are taught specifically not to shoot for the head, and many LE's are taught the same for different reasons.

chieftain
August 27, 2007, 03:20 AM
I agree with you, but I dont think its a fair comparison. Most civilians are taught specifically not to shoot for the head, and many LE's are taught the same for different reasons.


It isn't that they are taught "NOT" to shoot for the head. Most are not good enough to hit the head in a firefight. Until you can make the head shot while moving fore, aft, laterally both right or left, and at all angles, all that while being shot at, you are not ready.

The problem is not a hardware or caliber problem, it is a software problem. In this case, not enough training and quality practice.

Once again, if you are still asking what caliber, you really don't understand the question or the problem.

Go figure.

Fred

brownie0486
August 27, 2007, 10:01 AM
chieftain;

Most are not good enough to hit the head in a firefight.

There's a HUGE difference between working as a team, going on the hunt, weapons out, at the ready and moving through scenarios offensively vs. a civilian having to react to any given situation from concealed carry and having to react coming from behind the curve defensively.

The two widely different venues between clearly being ready for a fight with gun in hand aggressively moving through an objective and starting from gun holstered reacting to others input behind the curve are worlds apart and require completely different sets of skills to go home at the end of the day.

Seals don't get into firefights taken by surprise and without their guns already drawn and at the ready very often at all while us civilians have to work from that very scenario almost exclusively.

I'm sure you already knew that though when you wrote it./

Brownie

SWMAN
August 27, 2007, 11:10 AM
Given all that info, is the only reason LE agencies are going to 40 from 9mm to achieve more consistent expansion, and the only reason they are not going to 45 is because of expense and less rounds per magazine?

Larger availability of DA & DAO pistols are in 9mm & 40. Forty is a larger caliber and since 9mm has proven to be a lesser performer than .40, it gets the nod. FBI carries .40. Most .45 acp are chambered in the police administrators dreaded single action 1911. If the 45acp were to be chambered in DAs like the 220, you only get 8 rounds, rather than 11 or 12 in a DA or DAO .40. Double stack .45 auto would not be a one size fits all like most 9mm/.40 same framed semis. Non-shooters preceive the 1911 as a safety issue. Of course most all 1911s have at least two mechanical safeties, one more than most LEO weapons. Costs more to train the average LEO to be proficient with 1911s. DA/DAO easier to pull and shoot for most LEOs who shoot duty weapons 1x or 2x a year.

tinygnat219
August 27, 2007, 11:17 AM
This has turned into a caliber war. Request the mods to close this thread down.

Vitamin G
August 27, 2007, 01:21 PM
When was the last time a government agency did something that made sense?




(I'm either going with purchasing Alaska, which didn't make ANY sense at the time, or nuking Japan to save the lives of the soldiers.)

Rinspeed
August 27, 2007, 02:20 PM
I have searched and I have read the internet reports, the FBI reports, and quite a few articles.



Sounds like a big waste of time to me. They are all handgun rounds and will work some of the time if you're lucky. Pick one and practice as much as you can afford.

MikePGS
August 27, 2007, 02:32 PM
GaryArkansas, its a shame that your post is too long to use as a quote :)
As for any caliber, as Mr Stephen Camp elegantly argues (http://hipowersandhandguns.com/9mm%20vs%2045.htm) placement is power. Thats not to say that a .22 is as efficient as a .44 magnum, but when talking about these particular rounds... 9mm, .40, .45 there is hardly sufficient difference when using expanding ammunition. My guess... and its just a guess... is that LE agencies followed the trend of the FBI, which as has been previously mentioned on this thread was founded on inaccurate information. The miami shootout was ended with a .38 special. I have never seen anyone argue that a .38 special is equivalent or superior to a .45... yet we see that if its placed properly, it will do the job. So really i think the reason law enforcement agencies went to .40 is because the FBI did. Or maybe they think they're getting .45 power with 9mm capacity.

MrAcheson
August 27, 2007, 02:33 PM
People wanted more power than a 9mm in a similar sized firearm. You can't do this with .45 because you have to sacrifice a lot of mag capacity or the grip gets too big. But you can do it with .40 S&W.

Like most compromise rounds, .40 S&W isn't the best at anything. But it is second best at a lot of things. So it wins the points championship.

This has turned into a caliber war. Request the mods to close this thread down.Ditto.

Trifler
August 27, 2007, 06:15 PM
Only reason I won't ever be getting a 1911 is because the guns are too big for my hands. I can hold it, but my finger has to stretch to the limit to pull the trigger, which doesn't help accuracy, and it's impossible for me to work the safety or the magazine release with my primary hand.

If it's a problem for me, I'm sure it's a problem for some others.

littlegator
August 27, 2007, 06:29 PM
New Hampshire state police and hwy patrol just purchased a load of S&W M&P .45's. No compromise there.

chieftain
August 27, 2007, 06:48 PM
Only reason I won't ever be getting a 1911 is because the guns are too big for my hands. I can hold it, but my finger has to stretch to the limit to pull the trigger, which doesn't help accuracy, and it's impossible for me to work the safety or the magazine release with my primary hand.

If it's a problem for me, I'm sure it's a problem for some others.

BULL! You may not care for a 1911 which is fine. But don't use the "it don't fit" story. One of the strengths of the 1911 is it is so adaptable to particularly small handed people.

My youngest daughter stands 4' 10" at about 95lbs. She prefers my 1911's to any of my other hand guns Non-1911 Colt's, Hi Power's, SIG's, Glock's, Ruger's, Kahr's, S&W's, and many Revolvers etc...

She started shooting my Kimber Gold Combat Stainless series I. With the standard grips and trigger, and a S&A magwell.

She turns 21 next year. There will be one of my Government Colts in 45 of course waiting for her. With slim grip VZ gator backs and a short trigger, and straight main spring housing. She also prefers the light weight of the SU-16 Kel Tech carbine for her rifle. Set up with an Eotech. It will be packaged with the Colt.

Don't mess with Daddy's little girl.

My oldest daughter preferred a Glock. Glock 30 that is. Of course she is much taller at 5'5" & 29y/o.

My point is that the 1911 will fit more "small" hands than most other weapons.

Go figure.

Fred

Kentak
August 27, 2007, 07:00 PM
Tradition is the only thing keeping the .45 ACP going. Not really, but I thought I'd start with an attention getter.

The .40 throws a heavier bullet at about the same velocities as the 9mm. No contest, point to .40. The .40 gives about the same destructive energy as the .45, but with higher velocity for more consistent expansion. Plus, costs less and allows higher mag capacity. Point to .40.

Having said all that, if you've done your job and know how to shoot your choice well and to point of aim, and know where to aim, any of the "Three" will do its job.

K

Geronimo45
August 27, 2007, 07:51 PM
Why did PDs switch? Couldn't say for sure, but here's my theory:

Long ago, in a galaxy far, far away, there were people with nicknames such as 'Machine Gun,' 'Baby-Face', 'Bugsy' and the like. These people liked to escape the scene of the crime in automobiles. At that time, autos were made of metal. The .45 ACP and .38 Special cartridges didn't seem to do a good job of punching through car bodies and the odd 'bulletproof vest' that these folks wore. Cartridges such as the .38 Super and .357 Magnum tended to do a good job of punching through those barriers.

I have no idea if this is true with modern vehicles, with their plastic externals.

Since cops are likely to have to tangle with cars on a daily basis, the ability to shoot through one if need be may've been a major consideration. The .40 was probably sold as an 'improved 9mm'. Bigger caliber, similar velocity. The .45 was, many years ago, insufficient (from what I've heard) in the punching-through-cars department. Folks making the gun-change decision may've accepted ancient results as gospel. Couldn't say.

mavracer
August 27, 2007, 08:07 PM
The .40 throws a heavier bullet at about the same velocities as the 9mm. No contest, point to .40. The .40 gives about the same destructive energy as the .45, but with higher velocity for more consistent expansion. Plus, costs less and allows higher mag capacity. Point to .40.
The .45 throws a heavier bullet at about the same velocities as the .40. No contest, point to .45. The 9mm gives about the same destructive energy as the .40, but with higher velocity for more consistent expansion. Plus, costs less and allows higher mag capacity. Point to 9mm.
any of the "Three" will do its job.
to this we all agree.the .40 is an adaquate service round,but so are the 9mm and .45.

boomstik45
August 27, 2007, 09:25 PM
Does it really matter?

I'd be more concerned about going with what works best for me. And quite honestly, in the average imagined situation, any of the three mentioned will work. I can handle all three.

More important than caliber chosen is the platform you decide to use. The platform has to be reliable. Very reliable. Second, you have to find a load that works it in it reliably. In other words, it has to be a load that functions consistently and is consistently accurate. No sense in buying a box of ammunition that's the latest "ultra/tactical/whatever" $35/per 20rd box if it causes your weapon to jam and/or isn't as accurate in the weapon as you like. Or causes more recoil than you can reliably handle. After that, you can bother with capacity. If you want/need more rounds without reloading, then go higher capacity. Just remember that capacity is never a substitute for reliability and capacity. A few things to think about, although they are my opinion:

1. Don't bother carrying if you aren't willing/ prepared to shoot.

2. Don't shoot if you aren't willing/prepared to kill.

3. Number 1 is directly related to Number 2. This is serious.

4. Carry only that with which you are reasonably certain you can stop a threat with. Face it, shooting to stop is a both a goal and an ideal. Killing is a very real and sometimes necessary result. Killing is also the most certain "STOP."

5. Not the last idea or comment (but the last comment from me on this post). There is nothing here that is an original idea from me. Literally countless people have thought of or said it before me. This is a small collection of opinions and beliefs of mine that is shared by others, the vast majority of which would be people I don't know and never will know. But it is something serious to think about amidst the ultimately silly "caliber wars."

P.S. Oh yeah, one more comment (sorry :D). When it comes to the caliber wars, doing your homework is a good thing. Also, looking at data (that has evidence and/or is coming from a source you trust) is a good way to learn what the various calibers (and loads of said calibers) will or are capable of doing. Once you have this info, you can compare that with what you can handle and come up with a better idea of what you should be carrying.

Trifler
August 27, 2007, 10:22 PM
BULL! You may not care for a 1911 which is fine. But don't use the "it don't fit" story. One of the strengths of the 1911 is it is so adaptable to particularly small handed people.

My youngest daughter stands 4' 10" at about 95lbs. She prefers my 1911's to any of my other hand guns...

Ok... I never knew there was an "it don't fit" story so there's no way I could be repeating it. I held the gun and my fingers wouldn't reach. I've had two different instructors and three different gun salesmen try to see if I was holding it wrong and after various pointers I still couldn't reach the safety or the magazine release without using my off-hand. Can I shoot it? Sure. Can I reload it in a combat situation? Not very well. All eventually decided it was a less than ideal situation for me in a defense situation. I'm not singling out the 1911. I doubt any full size handgun frame would work well in my case, and I'm sad about it because I certainly didn't want it to be that way.

So I'm glad your daughter who's 4'10" loves to shoot it. I think that's great. However, don't think that her being able to shoot it well makes me a liar. She may have longer fingers than I do even though she's 5" shorter in height.

10-10
August 28, 2007, 04:39 PM
The more opinions I hear, the more undecided I become.

.45 hits harder, but with more felt recoil.

9mm doesn't hit as hard, but is quicker on the follow up shot.

But... I've fired a Glock 26 9mm, and that little sucker was jumping all over the place. Accuracy for me (catcher's mitts for hands) was terrible. Then again, a full sized heavy 1911 is much more controllable and accurate. But for CCW, size and weight matter...So I guess it's a case of
"Figure it out for yourself, bonehead!"

There will never be a consensus on the issue.

I think I'll be the first kid on the block with a shiny new HK P30, and learn to adapt to the weapon and the rounds that it fires.

10-10
August 28, 2007, 04:52 PM
Another thought; depending on the ammo chosen, a lot of lost ground can be made up. The personal defense rounds are intended to impart all of their energy into the target. That could make all the difference. But I still think that getting shot with a .22 short would absolutely ruin your whole day. So, in my opinion (we've all got one), any weapon (in any caliber) that you are able to master in terms of accuracy, is probably the best weapon in the world. For you.

Rinspeed
August 28, 2007, 04:55 PM
Hits don't really matter, what matters is you have 18 rounds handy.

brownie0486
August 28, 2007, 05:07 PM
Hits don't really matter, what matters is you have 18 rounds handy.

When you run out of ammo in the middle of an altercation/SD scenario as you carried 8 rds of 45, or any other single stack in 9mm, 40, 45 or a real handcannon and have to reload while taking incoming, you'll think "what matters is you have 18 rounds handy" [ without a reload ].

People have died reloading while the action is still "on", trying to solve a SD scenario they were thrown into.

At 4-5 rds per second, with the mantra from some that you need to shoot them until they are on the ground, 8-9 rds is gone in under two seconds. Make it two BG's or more [ very good possibility these days ], and 8-9 rds just isn't likely to last long enough to stop multiples before having to make a mandatory reload.

I'd rather reload when I have a chance to do so making it my choice than having to reload while taking incoming. 18rds would last 4+ seconds without a reload. Which would you rather have if you knew it was going down, 8-9 or 18?

Brownie

boomstik45
August 29, 2007, 01:48 AM
"Hits don't matter"

What insanity. If that's the case, then don't bother shooting at all. In fact, don't have a firearm.

You better make those hits, or the threat doesn't stop. Making those hits brings a less likely need for a reload.

Brownie, I see what you're saying. The multiple assailant argument has much merit. Higher capacity should never take the place of training and skill, though. A guy shooting a 7/8 round pistol who's making 7 or 8 hits on target beats a guy with 18 rounds at his disposal, but only hits the target 4 or 5 times out of 18 shots.

Having said that, if you can really do the business with a glock 17, you're on my team. The guy with the 1911 just needs a few more mags, if the fight is long, know what I mean? :)

brownie0486
August 29, 2007, 01:52 AM
Having said that, if you can really do the business with a glock 17, you're on my team. The guy with the 1911 just needs a few more mags, if the fight is long, know what I mean?

I understand exactly what you're saying:D

Brownie

chieftain
August 29, 2007, 03:05 AM
One absolute, more ammo than you may need is better than less Ammo than you need.

The real question is how much ammo do you need? I recommend that you carry one more round than you need. Just to be safe.

If you are going to be hit by human wave attacks, you will probably need more ammo than any weapon can hold. I have survived some of these attacks. I had enough ammo.

If you are going to be attacked by one guy, How much ammo do you need. That is a much more difficult question.

Just keep adding Bad Guys to your scenario, until you can't stop them anymore.

What we each need is enough ammo +1 for any practical scenario we feel we may run into. If you run into more than 2 guys, better lay your sidearm down and carry a rifle/Carbine/Shotgun. Now some folks may be confident in taking 3 or more gunmen on at once. I only have a few years of military combat experience. And I wouldn't if I could help it. I prefer the NIKE defense when more than one bad guy is involved in a civilian gun fight. If I have to I will fight, but not by choice.

The good news is that the vast majority of the time, the civilian bad guys don't handle getting killed real well. They will usually break off their attack if one or two get hit, let alone killed. It doesn't always work that way. That's why I carry more than one magazine.

Hope springs eternal. Sometimes I carry the 8+8 of one of my 1911's, some times I carry the 16+15 of one of my Browning/FN Hi powers'. On rare occasion, I may be carrying the 16+15 of my Glock 19. Because of arthritis, I cannot use my SIG 228, 229, 225, or 220 anymore.

I am sure that the survivors of other firefights can help me with their real life experiences.

Go figure.

Fred

Warren
August 29, 2007, 05:25 AM
Nine is fine!

Forty is sporty!

Forty-five ain't no jive!


Does that sum it up?

denfoote
August 29, 2007, 08:11 AM
Chieftain,
You probably have the most lucid postings of any I have read in this entire thread!!

In addition to the Nike, I would add the Richard Petty defense and the "You know better than to go into that neighborhood" defense!!

Avoiding trouble in the first place is the best way not to get into it and works 99.9999999% of the time!!!

For the rest, the caliber question can be solved by the advice of my CCW instructor, which is: Fire until the threat goes away!!
Only then does the ammo question enter in.
For example (those of you who DO NOT live in the Phoenix AZ metro area may, without loss of generality, skip over this) I carry more ammo when I HAVE to go to Maryvale than I do walking to the Circle K here in Buckeye.

Concertizing the abstraction, being aware of your surroundings and the time, using common sense and avoiding places where you might get into trouble, are going to work better than carrying the latest whizz bang tacticalkool mega sidearm of whatever caliber. But IF you have to be in such a place, then carrying enough ammo appropriate to the perceived threat level is a good thing. This does not, however negate any of the above!! In fact, it heightens it!! You have to be MORE aware of your surroundings and be prepared to use whatever means are at your disposal to escape BEFORE a threat escalates into violence!! Whatever business you might have to be in such a place certainly is not worth your life!!

suprmatch
August 29, 2007, 08:21 AM
I was told from a member in the law enforcement community that the Pennsylvania state police saw the problems LAPD were having trying to stop criminals in their tracks that the 9mm did not have the stopping power needed. So the PA state police went to .40. It almost has the stopping power a .45 has and alot less recoil. Now the PA state police think they need more stopping power without less recoil, so now they will be wasting more of my tax dollars :cuss:and are switching all of their standard issue pistols to .45 gap. Which means I will be able to pick up a inexpensive turnback .40. Thats what I was told.

JLStorm
August 29, 2007, 08:29 AM
Why go to the 45GAP why not just go to 45ACP, its cheaper than 45GAP and if people can handle the 40 recoil they can handle the 45!

Rinspeed
August 29, 2007, 08:33 AM
The real question is how much ammo do you need? I recommend that you carry one more round than you need. Just to be safe



That sounds about right :)

chieftain
August 29, 2007, 08:45 AM
[QUOTE]Chieftain,
You probably have the most lucid postings of any I have read in this entire thread!!

In addition to the Nike, I would add the Richard Petty defense and the "You know better than to go into that neighborhood" defense!!

Avoiding trouble in the first place is the best way not to get into it and works 99.9999999% of the time!!!

For the rest, the caliber question can be solved by the advice of my CCW instructor, which is: Fire until the threat goes away!!
Only then does the ammo question enter in.
For example (those of you who DO NOT live in the Phoenix AZ metro area may, without loss of generality, skip over this) I carry more ammo when I HAVE to go to Maryvale than I do walking to the Circle K here in Buckeye.
QUOTE]

Mr DenFoote,

Thank you for your comments. Roger your Maryvale observation too.

We may need to have a cup of coffee or such together. I am in Sun City. I am a Bonafide old fart.

Lived for 30 years on the other side of the valley in Mesa just moved to the west side a year ago. My daughters were born and raised there.

Although I am a Florida Boy, I married a Girl from LA. when I finally got out of the Corps, I refused to live in California. That was in 76, if anything my decision was spot on. You couldn't pay me to live over there.

Besides they all come here and Californicate Arizona.

I much prefer the free states of Arizona or Florida vs the peoples republic of **********.

Go figure.

Fred

Master Blaster
August 29, 2007, 08:59 AM
Marketing by the Gun manufacturers. Cheap prices to get Departments interested in new guns.

It has a 9mm size frame, and holds more rounds than a .45 in a larger frame.
9mm is the light fast round with lots of penetration, .45acp round is the slow heavy manstopper with match grade accuracy.

40 S&W? I owned one for a while, and didnt care for it at all. Much less pleasant to shoot than a .45.

Autolycus
August 29, 2007, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by Ghost Tracker: Police Departments now regularly deal with applicants (and eventually rookies) who, unlike past generations, have NEVER fired a gun, ANY gun, before their first Firearm Orientation Class during Police Training. Departments are also dealing (under legal & cultural pressure) with an ever-increasing number of female officers. Hand size, physical strength and previous firearm experience all attribute to a now-required "sensitivity" on the part of the Department to their officers who are required to CARRY guns but are unable to QUALIFY with large .45 acp autoloaders. It's the same issue the FBI had when they wanted to issue 10mm pistols. Female agents filed lawsuit after lawsuit claiming that a 10mm qualification requirement was "discriminatory" because the weight & recoil was more easily handled by a male agent!
Got any links to something talking about these lawsuits?

Colt
August 29, 2007, 12:45 PM
Now the PA state police think they need more stopping power without less recoil, so now they will be wasting more of my tax dollars and are switching all of their standard issue pistols to .45 gap.

This is correct. I'm supposed to head to the range soon with a trooper friend to try out his new Glock, which he picks up next week.

By coincidence, I ordered a HK P2000 in .40 yesterday. It should be here in time to make the trip, too.

Maybe I'll post a compare & contrast range report.

PPGMD
August 29, 2007, 01:20 PM
Well we have already discussed the reasoning behind the 40, personally I think it's a great round, it's not currently in my stable, but I am looking to readd it back in.

Here's what I shoot:

Competition Gun/Daily Shooter: 9mm
Carry Gun: 9mm (going to get a 40 as a medium concealed carry with a 45 as a large concealed carry)
Home Defense/Weekly fun gun: Suppressed 45

The 40 is a great round in short barrel, small frame guns. When size is not a concern the 45 is a great round. And when you have to go small and stay in a major pistol caliber you can go 9mm.

What I am looking at for carry guns:
9mm: Walther PPS or Kahr, or Keltec
40: Hk P2000SK
45: Hk 45c (the new one coming out)

don95sml
August 29, 2007, 06:30 PM
Sounds mostly political to me. Anyone offering a "compromise" is automatically a hero.

.357 magnum
August 29, 2007, 09:32 PM
For being a bit of a caliber war, at least we stayed respectful for the most part. For the record my HD gun and favorite SD gun is the .45 I Love the XD .45 I now have three, one is a tactical two are service models. [when the MP comes out with their 14rd mag for their .45 I will get one!] To me the .40 is still a better stopper then the 9mm. I own two 9mm, one a Taurus 24/7 and a Smith MP full size 9mm-- they are both awesome guns! I would trust my life to my 9mm's especially since I shoot them so well. But given a choice of 9mm or .40 I would go with the .40- it is a very deadly round. The .45 trumps them both:evil:. In the end I Love them all and they all have their place.:)

The Best to all!

Frank

mavracer
August 29, 2007, 10:17 PM
For being a bit of a caliber war, at least we stayed respectful for the most part.
+1
I really don't have anything against the .40 and if I were in law enforcement I would have no problem with being issued one.I would have a problem and avoid certain platforms.
Its just that when the 40 was introduced I already had 9mms,10mms and .45 acps at my disposal and reloaded for them.the only way I'm getting one is if they outlaw the others or somebody wills me one ,I am a little sentimental and would never get rid of a gift.
ultimatly the 40 gets picked because its middle of the road.more power than 9mm and more rounds than the 45 ( of course less power than 45 andless rounds than 9mm. sorry couldn't help it.)but it exists because a 9mm failed in miami and the 10mm is too much for some to handle.on a side note winchester has even redesigned the silvertip line since 1986 and there are many 9mm loadings today that might have worked to stop platte.

IMTHDUKE
August 30, 2007, 12:19 AM
That said, the .40 isn't very much fun to shoot.

Well, that's one vote. As for me, I just love to shoot the 40 in my Sig P239 SAS.

Warren
August 30, 2007, 02:31 AM
Quote:
That said, the .40 isn't very much fun to shoot.
Well, that's one vote. As for me, I just love to shoot the 40 in my Sig P239 SAS.

I find the fotay to be painful. After a 100 or so rounds my elbow just can't take anymore. I have no such problems with either the 9mm or the Hammer of God .45.

Weird I know. I was looking for a heavy forty for a while but I've decided I'd rather have a light 9 for ccw.

easyg
August 30, 2007, 08:33 AM
The .40 is as easy as a 9mm to shoot.

Even my mother (who is 68 and not very big) can shoot 50 rounds of .40 without even getting tired.
And she's fairly accurate...considering her vision.

davinci
August 30, 2007, 09:09 AM
I can tell you why the VERY FIRST PISTOL I BOUGHT WAS A 40... it was back in 2001, and I went to the gun shop...didn't know anything at all about what I was looking at. I asked about glocks. the gun shop owner asked "you ever shot a glock" "nope. never shot anything."

He then went and did a very nice thing....he started giving me information. My eyes started to glaze over and I kept looking at the glocks. He took a glock out, handed it to me, then asked what I thought... I told him I liked it. He said "good, give it back." I was 21 then.... he put the glock back in the case and pulled out a sheet of paper, then asked "Is this for defense or sport?" I told him mostly for fun. He started writing. The first thing he wrote on the paper was 3 calibers. 9mm big, around for 50 yrs, 40s&w little bigger around for 10 yrs, 45acp biggest, combat round for a century.

Then he sent me on my way with some brilliant advice. "Research these three and come back, I'll sell you a pistol." I went home and did some research then came back a few days later, where I found out I was a little too young to buy a pistol. Got a 40s&w Taurus (beretta 92 clone) and I was a happy camper. Research showed that 40cal wasn't all that more expensive than 9mm and had a little more velocity, and many LEO's shot 40cal....that was enough evidence for me to pick that caliber.

If Glock would have marketed better, then the 45GAP would be a very common round.

.357 magnum
August 30, 2007, 04:46 PM
Quote:--since 1986 and there are many 9mm loadings today that might have worked to stop platte.

I totally agree! In 21 years bullet technology has gotten much better. I really like my two 9mm- if you ever get a chance try the Smith- MP I have two MP's a 9mm and .40 The MP has turned out to be an awesome gun. I want the MP .45 when they change the mag capacity to 14. If you want to spend less money go with the Taurus 24/7- 9mm this gun has been totally reliable and has a lot of nice features.

The Best to you and Yours!

Frank

mpmarty
August 30, 2007, 05:28 PM
This is all well and good, but here locally the cops carry .40 glock 22s and those who wish to carry 10mm 20s. It is always fun to watch the local LEOs come out to our gun club to play. The guys shooting the 40s are ecstatic if they keep all rounds on target at twenty five yards. After they all qualify, the guys with the 10mm glock 20s go over to the rifle range and engage targets at a hundred yards and yes, scoring as though they were shot at twenty five yards, they qualify again. I carry 10mm because I don't have to compromise and anyone who thinks the downloaded low powered fotay is comparable to the ten is welcome to come on out and play at our range anytime. I've even got some 40 S&W 180 gr rounds I'll donate as I use them in an aftermarket barrel in my ten for cheap practice to the tune of three or four hundred rounds a week, but when I go back out the club gate, the ten barrel is in place and the original Norma loading of 200gr jhp at over 1200fps is the load I pack.:)

briang2ad
August 30, 2007, 06:40 PM
I've even got some 40 S&W 180 gr rounds I'll donate as I use them in an aftermarket barrel in my ten for cheap practice to the tune of three or four hundred rounds a week,

This is exactly why most folks get the 40. You can get it pretty cheap compared to the 45, and while more than the 9, it has more power. It is 20-30% cheaper than the 45 for practice ammo or otherwise.

It DOES have more power and weight than the 9mm. It is most likely the equal to or better than the 45 in terms of gunfighting - at least in data of 'one shot stops' it is, and better than the 9. It is reasonably priced, and easy to buy. Now, it is a self licking ice cream cone because as it has been adopted by the LEOs, it is easier to get.

Sure, 10mm is great if you reload, and can spend quite a bit on ammo.

Highland Ranger
August 30, 2007, 10:41 PM
I wonder how many posters in this thread have:

1. shot all 3 calibers

2. Shot all 3 calibers from multiple frames, and understand how subjective things like "accuracy" and recoil are when measured by the hand and not with instruments

3. understand that there are liars, damn liars and statisticians

Further posters should state that they meet these 3 requirements before posting.

:-)

(oh and the ultimate stopper is 22lr - please add that to the coversation as well)

brownie0486
August 31, 2007, 12:20 AM
2. Shot all 3 calibers from multiple frames, and understand how subjective things like "accuracy" and recoil are when measured by the hand and not with instruments

The hand would measure the same recoil impulse as the instrument. How that recoil is perceived is a different area of discussion. The recoil impulse would not change between the two all things being equal [ load data from the same guns ].

No matter how you slice it, the 40 in the same platform as the 9 would produce MORE recoil impulse to the hand.

Brownie

Monkeybear
August 31, 2007, 01:29 AM
Thanks for the new sig line chieftain, hope you don't mind.

FireCaptDave
August 31, 2007, 02:54 AM
I have a G26 because I happened to get a super good deal on 10,000 rounds of 40 S&W and I needed something to shoot it in.

Doesn't the G26 shoot 9mm??? :confused:

Rexster
August 31, 2007, 09:54 AM
Having been in law enforcement since the revolver was the norm, and following the "stopping power" and "firepower" debates all this time, I think the .40 has become so dominant due to the fact it's a compromise cartridge, which dimensionally fits the same size envelope as 9mm pistol frames. Police handgun cartridges are political issues, whether it is local government politics or police union politics, and compromise is a big thing in politics. FWIW, I have fired all three cartridges extensively, used all three of them on duty, but have not fired all three of them in the same exact type of weapon, such as, for example, in the 1911, which has been chambered in all three. Each cartridge seems to have its own, well, let's say "personality." I find the .40 to indeed be "snappier" than the other two, IMHO. The .45 ACP may have more total recoil, but the pistol accelerates rearward more gradually, or so it seems to me. Working night shift patrol, I qual at night most of the time, and I miss the dull orange flicker of flame from the .45 that is so kind to my night vision, as the .40 has been my duty load since 2002. I have not read nearly all the posts here, so if I just plowed the same ground as someone else, it was not intentional.

Shipwreck
August 31, 2007, 11:09 AM
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/Website%20Stuff/888486789_d79ce26993_o.jpg

Harley Quinn
August 31, 2007, 12:41 PM
The Glock 26 http://www.gunshopfinder.com/Glock/g26.asp

The Glock 27 http://www.remtek.com/arms/glock/model/40/27/index.htm

One number off amigo.

It just goes to prove the 9mm or the 40 cal are very close to each other:neener:

chieftain
August 31, 2007, 05:43 PM
It DOES have more power and weight than the 9mm. It is most likely the equal to or better than the 45 in terms of gunfighting - at least in data of 'one shot stops' it is, and better than the 9. It is reasonably priced, and easy to buy. Now, it is a self licking ice cream cone because as it has been adopted by the LEOs, it is easier to get.


Very interesting that so many folks THINK the 40 has more "POWER" than the 9mm.

For some folks education.

Standard loads.

9mm= 124gr @ 1250fps
40S&W = 180gr @950fps
45acp = 230 @ 850fps

The 9 and 45 are both NATO standards. The 40 is the standard load & velocity as originally published by Remington, Winchester, Federal etal.

Now for you folks that know the math, do the energy numbers.

So much for the myth of the lack of "POWER" in the 9mm. In fact the energy of the 9mm is GREATER than either 45 or 40.

One can mix and match and change those numbers. But lets talk apples and apples, vs apples and oranges. Standard loads.

Otherwise we go back to todays selected bullets, and no caliber has any advantage then any other.

Give it up. If you like the 40 you like it. Don't try to rationalize it. There is no other valid argument except "I believe". Now we are into religion.

I like 45 or 9, doesn't really matter to me. If you "believe" your 40 is better, fine. Just don't blow smoke up my skirt. In the end, there really isn't any difference.

If you still think caliber is important, I you don't understand the question.

Go figure.

Fred

briang2ad
August 31, 2007, 07:10 PM
You picked a set of numbers that do service your 'argument'. But, all defense loadings in the 9mm have to go into the +P realm to get close to the 40. Also, the record gunfight numbers for the 40 are better - and maybe not enough to matter. OK - but it is a novel argument to declare the 9mm MORE powerful.

boomstik45
August 31, 2007, 09:21 PM
Chieftan,

I get what you're saying, but there's a bit more to it. While I'm not condemning any of the cartridges mentioned, I will say that some do things that others don't. For instance, when shooting at some steel targets (the kind that you're trying to knock down), I and several others had issues trying to knock them down with 9mm. Even the 147 grainers were hit and miss. Every .40 and .45 load we used knocked the plates down. 10mm didn't just knock them down, it got a few of them stuck in the dirt.

Secondly, go to the box o' truth.com and see what each does against windshields and what not. The differences are merely a fact, with substantial data to back it up, not a condemnation of a particular caliber. I still like 9mm for serious work. But there ARE differences in what each caliber can or will do. And then, of course, there are different loadings of each. For a person to deny that there are quanitfiable differences is simply incorrect.

FerFAL
August 31, 2007, 09:35 PM
Why? Pretty simple. You can have 15+1 rounds in an average sized gun, unlike 45 ACP. And you have NICE stopping power with premium .40, even better stopping power than with most 45 ACP even if many have a hard time accepting that.
I like all calibers, 45 ACP is a classic, but 40 S&W is a better compromise with just as much power and a lot more ammo. It is NOT easier to shoot than 45 ACP, anyone that thinks so needs more time with both calibers. Heck, I prefer 357 SIG. :p

FerFAL

boomstik45
August 31, 2007, 10:09 PM
To be honest, FerFal, I feel that there are more high quality, consistent performing loads in available in .40 than there are in 9mm or .45. But that's just my opinion...not a fact by any means.

Harley Quinn
August 31, 2007, 10:16 PM
FerFal,
I second the 357 Sig. I shoot it out of my Glock 22, I have a 6.5 " barrel and a 4" barrel for it. Made by Lone Wolf...

http://208.67.249.201/showthread.php?threadid=716844

I have a 6.5" barrel for my .40 cal and a Glock std barrel that fit the Mdl 22.

I have a Mdl 17L with a 6" barrel and I also have a std slide and barrel that goes on it.

I like to shoot um all, but I now have the 357 Sig with me like American Express.

Good round, I shoot it and have all the makings for reloading up 1500 rounds when I get the time.:cool:

HQ:D

FerFAL
September 1, 2007, 12:35 AM
It’s still relatively new and as always it takes time to get accepted. Expensive, high pressures, and you need a good platform to shoot it, but on the other hand the bottle neck round feeds more reliably than any other straight wall round ( never had a single FTF, any other 357 SIG shooter had feeding problems out there? ) it’s very accurate, and sending that 125 JHP pill at +1500 FPS (http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=32&products_id=79)(4.5 “ barrel) , you just know the love gets received at the other end. :D
I agree with Brownie, specially on what he said on that PDF article. These days, a 5 or 6 shot wheel gun is more of a BUG and not a main gun. When bad guys start showing up with high capacity autos and attacking in packs, you need all the help you can get, including a lot of ammo in your magazine. 4 or 5 rounds per gunfight was the norm back in the day when high capacity autos weren’t as popular.

FerFAL

chieftain
September 1, 2007, 06:36 AM
You picked a set of numbers that do service your 'argument'. But, all defense loadings in the 9mm have to go into the +P realm to get close to the 40. Also, the record gunfight numbers for the 40 are better - and maybe not enough to matter. OK - but it is a novel argument to declare the 9mm MORE powerful.

Nope. Those are not arbitrary numbers. They are THE STANDARDS for each of the rounds under discussion. Of course there are many other combo's you can mix and match with. That is why I use standards. What do you use?

What record of 40 gunfight numbers are better. Frankly the 40 hasn’t been around that long. I don’t think it is any worse than the daddy of them all the 9mm or the slightly younger 45acp.

Once again, If you can do the math, you know I am stating facts as to the energy figures. Facts, not religious beliefs with arbitrary numbers.


I get what you're saying, but there's a bit more to it. While I'm not condemning any of the cartridges mentioned, I will say that some do things that others don't. For instance, when shooting at some steel targets (the kind that you're trying to knock down), I and several others had issues trying to knock them down with 9mm. Even the 147 grainers were hit and miss. Every .40 and .45 load we used knocked the plates down. 10mm didn't just knock them down, it got a few of them stuck in the dirt.

Secondly, go to the box o' truth.com and see what each does against windshields and what not. The differences are merely a fact, with substantial data to back it up, not a condemnation of a particular caliber. I still like 9mm for serious work. But there ARE differences in what each caliber can or will do. And then, of course, there are different loadings of each. For a person to deny that there are quanitfiable differences is simply incorrect.

If the purpose of your cartridge is to move steel or solids, heavier rounds will work better. Now reconcile that for 80 years the knock on the 9mm has been over penetration. In fact you will find that in bullet bouncers (bullet proof vests) the 9mm is the toughest for the vest to defeat. In fact during the roaring 30’s the most gun knowledgeable folks carried a cartridge that penetrated the bullet bouncers of the era better than any other. A 9mm that goes by the name of 38super.

My point is if moving steel or for that matter bowling pins is your mission, go with the 45 I do. The 40 will do better than the 9mm too.

AS to the windshield test. I cannot speak for the 45, historically a weak penetrator, but the 9mm with solid copper bullets can get the job done. I frankly don‘t know if that is true of the 45 too. That is one area I believe the 40S&W is superior. For me though, I cannot envision a Home or self defense scenario where I could or would legally shoot through the front windshield of a car.

If your mission is to penetrate the human body, the 9mm does a better job. And has longer than any other fighting handgun cartridge. In fact no greater luminaries than the Late LtCol Cooper and Chuck Taylor admitted the 45 did have problems with penetration.

I have witnessed this problem myself on the battlefield. Now the Jello murderers tell us “penetration” is the key. Well the 9 has that in spades, at least as compared to the 40 and 45 in the human body.

But then your mission is knocking down steel and such. For my CCW weapons, stopping humans is the mission.

Go figure.


Why? Pretty simple. You can have 15+1 rounds in an average sized gun, unlike 45 ACP. And you have NICE stopping power with premium .40, even better stopping power than with most 45 ACP even if many have a hard time accepting that.

Nope, the 40 has no more or any less stopping power than the 9mm or the 45acp.


I like all calibers, 45 ACP is a classic, but 40 S&W is a better compromise with just as much power and a lot more ammo. It is NOT easier to shoot than 45 ACP, anyone that thinks so needs more time with both calibers. Heck, I prefer 357 SIG

I disagree as to the 40 being a better compromise. It is no better or worse than the 45acp.

I only have hand guns in: 22, 32, 380, 38spl, 357mag, 38super, 40S&W, 45acp, 45 Colt, 9mm, 357SIG, 44spl, and 44Mag.

So I am sure you have much more time than I do shooting the various calibers.

Ability to shoot any caliber well or poorly comes from the shooter, not the weapon or caliber. Granted there was a reason Cooper had to create a minor category. He knew the 9mm would be the top gun otherwise. And in the end a 9mm did become the top caliber in the open class, 38super pushed to shoot major.

AS to ease of shooting. One of my close shooting buddies thinks the 9mm recoil is to ‘snappy’ compared to his collection of 40S&W Glock’s. He bought a 9mm, to save the price of store bought ammo. He got rid of it. His words “to ‘snappy’ for me.” He is a range Master at one range, and shoots competition several times a week. IDPA, USPSA and Pins.

If I was to starting shooting today vs. the 50 years I have been shooting, I would be using 357SIG. I have several weapons in 357SIG. It just isn't worth the logistics to me, at this time, to change over.

Besides, there is no gain in the stopping power.

Go figure.

Fred

Geno
September 1, 2007, 06:57 AM
See, you all took a look at the wrong 9mm, take a peek at the .38 Super. Now there's a 9mm! A 124 Gn projectile at 1,594?! Hello!

I love caliber wars. :neener:

Warren
September 1, 2007, 07:01 AM
So Chieftan, you are not talking about the 9mm Luger specifically but 9mm rounds in general?

I took this thread to be about the 9mm Luger vs. X and X not .355ish bullets as a family vs. X and X.

Warren
September 1, 2007, 07:05 AM
Doc beat me to it.

1594 FPS? I just googled and the top I could find (in less than two minutes of searching I admit) was 1440 (124gr RNFMJ, 7.2 gr, IMR SR 7625, 1440 fps,).

Still would leave a mark though.

Geno
September 1, 2007, 07:17 AM
Seriously, 1,594 FPS with reloads. Factory loads, no. I've posted that fact before in other threads. It's the reason I no longer purchase factory loaded .38 Supers. But wow, 1,594 is right up there with the .357 Sig.

Warren
September 1, 2007, 07:23 AM
So with deviation you could get over 1600? Cause that is a nice big round number.

If it is that close to the Sig why did they not just use .38 Super? The shorter case was important I guess.

briang2ad
September 1, 2007, 10:28 AM
Nope. Those are not arbitrary numbers. They are THE STANDARDS for each of the rounds under discussion. Of course there are many other combo's you can mix and match with. That is why I use standards. What do you use?

What record of 40 gunfight numbers are better. Frankly the 40 hasn’t been around that long. I don’t think it is any worse than the daddy of them all the 9mm or the slightly younger 45acp.

Once again, If you can do the math, you know I am stating facts as to the energy figures. Facts, not religious beliefs with arbitrary numbers.

I realize that your numbers were not arbitrary. However, life changed for thr 40 as soon as it hit the street. Any amount of searching on the web, and you can find that most 40 shooters use a 40 SD load like this:

DoubleTap 9mm+P
115gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1415fps - 12.00" / .70" 511 ft pds
124gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1310fps - 13.25" / .70" 473
147gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1125fps - 14.00" / .66" 413 ft lbs

DoubleTap .40 S&W Penetration / expansion
135gr. Nosler JHP @ 1375fps - 12.10" / .72" 567 ft lbs
155gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1275fps - 13.00" / .76" 560 ft lbs
165gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1200fps - 14.0" / .70" 528
180gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1100fps - 14.75" / .68" 484 ft lbs
200gr XTP @ 1050fps - 17.75" / .59" 490


But this is virtually duplicated by other manufacturers, only MOST load the 9mm a little softer - DT loads the 9 pretty hot. This table is actually favorable to the 9mm in a way. Most SD forty loads are in the high 400 to low 500 FP range. MOST 9mm loads available don't go there. And... you get more retained weight in the slug. With numbers, the 9mm ain't equal. And, I don't believe the 'gunfight numers' show them equal either. Again, it MAY be close enought that it doesn't matter, but THAT fact doesn't make the 40 nonsensical for PDs to adopt. This based on at least some objective reasoning.

Of course true Religion is also supported by objective reasoning (see Romans 1).

Harley Quinn
September 1, 2007, 11:08 AM
Seriously, 1,594 FPS with reloads. Factory loads, no. I've posted that fact before in other threads. It's the reason I no longer purchase factory loaded .38 Supers. But wow, 1,594 is right up there with the .357 Sig.

That has to have some serious pressure:what: Anyone want to look at the 38 Super Hmmm Wonder why Glock never made one to fit that round.

I am wondering if there is any after market barrels out there for it. :uhoh:

People complain about the pressure of the 357 Sig :rolleyes:

KenpoProfessor
September 1, 2007, 05:51 PM
All I know is I've got two glocks, an M21SF and an M23. With these two Glocks, all I have to do is swap barrels and I'm shooting .45,10mm, 400 Corbon and .40 Super out of the 21, and .40, .357 Sig, and 9mm out of the 23. I have the advantage of shooting most any caliber, and with the Mech Tech Conversion Units, I can shoot 10mm, .45, .40, .357 Sig, and 9mm out of the same two guns.

For the life of me I can't figure out why this isn't done more often. I talk to people all the time that don't know they can swap barrels on their Glocks and caliber juggle with both pistol and rifle configs.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

Elm Creek Smith
September 1, 2007, 08:19 PM
The Texas Rangers are issued SIG P226 semiautomatics chambered in .357 SIG or (and less popular!) SIG P220's in .45 ACP. The 125 grain .357 SIG matches the ballistics of the 125 grain .357 Magnum and the stopping power thereof.

Not all LEO agencies go with the three choices the OP put forward.

ECS

Harley Quinn
September 1, 2007, 08:41 PM
Here is some good information on the differences, between the 9mm and 38 Super.

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38SuperTo9mm.htm

Then along came the 357 Sig better to reload (case config) etc.

http://www.gunweek.com/2002/feature0210.html

doc2rn
September 1, 2007, 08:54 PM
Our PD here in Topeka went to the 40 but switched back in less than a month to the 9mm; due to ammo issues something about failure feed problems.

milo z
September 1, 2007, 09:07 PM
I think the numbers cited up there do show a legitimate advantage for the .40S&W round - but they also demand that you believe three-quarters of an inch and 40 feet lbs of energy will make a meaningful difference in a gunfight. I am not sure that I do.

Harley Quinn
September 2, 2007, 12:49 PM
My honest opinion is that 9 mm is about the best all around for LEO.

They all are not good shooters and the 9 mm is easier to handle and they carry more bullets. It is a situation of serving more of the crew, rather than the few.

The way to overcome the lack of confidence is to be a better shot and to practice with it more. Take a good self defense course, and become a better person, all around in defense.

The look of many LEO is really not a good thing. Overweight and out of shape is common in many of the departments.
They have many items to use before they have to resort to the firefight. But when it comes up, they need to be very good at hitting the target IMHO.

Socrates
September 2, 2007, 03:16 PM
The basis for the switch is the FBI ordering up a 180 grain bullet at 980 fps, that penetrates 17.9", and, even though it was a 10mm load, that's what they went with.

The 40 is capable of producing that load, at reasonable pressure. Double Tap ammo is a good place to start, since only their XTP loads penetrate the desired 18" after Platt and company.

By slowing the bullet down, they reduced expansion from around .96" to .6-.7 inches. However, everyone can shoot it, and, it fits in lots of guns.

It's not a bad compromise. 9mm, except for the 147 grain bullets can't penetrate that well, or, is inconsistent in expansion. Also, velocity isn't very good with that heavy a bullet.

.40 with Longshot or Universal powder, can move the 180 grain bullet at the target speed with a minimum pressure of 25k. This means very mild recoil, if loaded with a those good powders. Also, the bigger bullets mean more consistent expansion, and, greater bone breaking ability. It was a wise choice by Urey Patrick . In the 10mm it was even better, because the larger case meant pressure could be about the same as the 45 ACP.

The FBI argument was that the 45ACP was proven, and therefore not exciting.:rolleyes: They also had specs for a gun that no one had built at the time, and, they ordered something like 10k guns from S&W. It often looks like politics influence the choices as much as ballistics. The 45 ACP had just been canned by the military, I think this was 89, and that was an unpopular choice with Congress.
good powder.

The 10MM notes,

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf

Give a wonderful look at the history, and examination of the three calibers, and, how the choice was made. The FBI has been a leader for LEO, and, through LEO, for CCW, thanks to our legal system.

Please read page 5 Reasons for Adoption of 10MM, and, you'll have an answer to this question. It's in PDF, and, with Acrobat Reader I can't copy and paste it. The 45 worked as well, or better then the 10mm, really 40 S&W load they tested, but, on page 6 they go into why they picked the 10MM, with a load that was a minimum pressure load for a 40 S&W, much less for the 10MM.

In short, the FBI did a really good job of creating the 10MM platform in a way that would allow all the Political concerns to be addressed. It's a great read.

They gun, the M1076, cost them about 246 dollars each, and they ordered 9500 of them. At 35 oz, loaded, with the FBI load, the guns recoil at Recoil Energy of 5 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 12 fps.
The 147 grain load for the 9mm would recoil at
Recoil Energy of 3 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 10 fps.. And, the 45 ACP 185 grain load would be Recoil Energy of 4 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 11 fps..

9 was out, lack of bullet weight, penetration, and it was too old.
45 was out due to politics, and, that the bullet performance wasn't as consistent as the 40, or 10mm, excuse me.

When I look at the whole thing, considering the climate at the time, they did an excellent job of coming up with a gun everyone could shoot, increasing penetration, and, at very little difference in recoil, 1 ft lb.

Moving from the 10mm, after looking at the stats on recoil, I can only conclude that either a lot of folks in the FBI can tell a pea under their mattresses, that is, to complain about the increase in recoil is pretty absurd, or, the ammunition makers used a cheap, high recoiling powder, trying to make money on the contract, that actually DID make the 10mm run at higher pressure, and more recoil, then was necessary to reach the ballistic goal of the FBI.
S esq.

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm is cheaper & performs well, 45 is more proven, why all the agencies going 40S&W??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!