Why the lack of love for the .40?


PDA






AKElroy
March 7, 2009, 11:08 PM
In the brief time I have been with THR, I see very little love for the .40 S&W. Lot's of support for 9's, .45's. If the eternal debate is for the 9 for its capacity vs. the .45 for its take down power, does anyone share my view that the .40 pretty much silences this debate? Energy numbers that match or exceed our pet .45 loads, capacity maybe -1 vs. the common 9's. Where's the love for the shorty .40?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why the lack of love for the .40?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
bannockburn
March 7, 2009, 11:44 PM
AKElroy

I don't know for sure but I've had a few in that caliber but never seemed to hang on to them for very long. It's also kind of strange in that a number of gun stores I go to have plenty of .40S&W ammo available but next to nothing in 9mm. and .45ACP. One WallyWorld store I frequent had no 9mm. or .45, but they had 2 cases (40 boxes), of .40S&W neatly arranged on the shelf. Another store had nothing but UMC bulk packs of .40S&W on hand; everything else was sold out. Now I know .40S&W pistols are popular and probably account for a decent number of sales, but it seems very odd that there's so much more ammo available for it than all the other calibers combined.

Zak Smith
March 7, 2009, 11:50 PM
It's the most-used caliber in USPSA by a large margin. Is that love?

sarduy
March 8, 2009, 01:11 AM
9mm Fan here...

.45 ACP? not really

.45 GAP? a big plus

.40sw ummmm.. No comments

PT1911
March 8, 2009, 01:16 AM
I like shooting 45's for the thrill and knock down power if needed, but I also enjoy shooting 9mm because of the capacity and reasonable knock down power.... I personally choose not to shoot the .40 (yet) because I started shooting 45's, then... since 45 is so expensive to shoot, I decided to get something cheaper to shoot... 9 fits the bill.... no reason to save a dollar a box of ammo and get a 40 when I can pay just over half the price of the .45 and get a box of 9mm.... It pretty much came down to convenience for me... nothing at all to do with the round itself... if I could bet .40 for 12 bucks a box, I would have gotten one by now...

freakshow10mm
March 8, 2009, 01:25 AM
Because 10mm can do the same thing that the .40 does but the .40 cannot ever be a 10mm.

badbadtz560
March 8, 2009, 01:33 AM
well that's just what .40 is.. the in betweener.. I'd use a .45 if I needed takedown power.. and a .22 or 9mm for practice.. sure .40 could satisfy both reasonably well.. but that means I would only need one pistol for everything :D

blkbrd666
March 8, 2009, 01:38 AM
Already had too many calibers when .40 came along.

Zak Smith
March 8, 2009, 01:43 AM
Because 10mm can do the same thing that the .40 does but the .40 cannot ever be a 10mm.
Besides splitting a few ballistic hairs, the actual answer is that .40SW can fit in a 9mm-size pistol, whereas 10mm requires a larger frame, magazines, and action (ie, same length as .45ACP). So one might say that that's something the .40SW "can do" but 10mm "can't do."

10mm was conceived as an ideal pistol cartridge by Jeff Cooper, but it was later downsized for the reasons above - and that full-house 10mm was a "hand full" to shoot.

Heck, many of the criticisms of the .40SW are that it's "snappy" to shoot, IE, it's still a "hand full" in a 9mm-size pistol.

okespe04
March 8, 2009, 03:47 AM
In 90 years I will review the .40 and see how it has served those who carried it. Until then I will stick with the tried and tested. My choice is .45 but I have nothing against 9mm. both have proved their worth.

buttrap
March 8, 2009, 03:52 AM
Well as the .40 dupicates the old 38-40 load but uses better bullets my guess is about 140 years of history tends to show why the .40 is so popular now.

Hostile Amish
March 8, 2009, 04:01 AM
.40 is weird.

sohcgt2
March 8, 2009, 04:27 AM
I don't expect I'll ever buy a 9mm handgun, and I certainly enjoy my 2 .45's but I carry a .40SW every day. Plus if all three are options are loaded to standard the .40 has the most energy at the muzzle and the most energy down range. I don't know if the smaller lighter bullet of the .40 has the stopping power of the larger .45, but 2 spare magazines plus a loaded gun with my Glock 22 is 46 rounds, With my 1911 it's only 25, even with the Glock 21 it's only 40rds. I'm not a spray and pray guy but if SHTF I think more is better.

zt77
March 8, 2009, 04:35 AM
my own opinion on this is that if i wanted power i would go all out or since shot placement is more important, less recoil+that one more round= 9mm>.40

Ridgerunner665
March 8, 2009, 04:41 AM
Nothing at all wrong with the 40...I just like 45 better.

TimboKhan
March 8, 2009, 04:47 AM
Speaking for myself, it boils down to the fact that I can't think of a compelling reason to buy a .40 given my .45's and 9mm's. Add to that both of my .357's and there just isn't a good reason to buy yet another caliber.

It's not that I don't like the round, and if I were a first time buyer, a .40 would be a definite option. As it stands, I just am not interested in it. I can understand why others like it though. The ones I have shot seem to work pretty well, there are a variety of guns chambered for it, and it is relatively cheap to shoot.

Yo2slick
March 8, 2009, 04:49 AM
I love my 9mm and when I want something bigger I go straight to the .45ACP. If your going to be a bear, might as well be a grizzly.

Kind of Blued
March 8, 2009, 04:49 AM
For a lack of a reason to love it.

There's nothing wrong with it, but I have no reason or desire to own a gun chambered for the cartridge.

Spyvie
March 8, 2009, 05:02 AM
I know .40 has been around for a while now and is fairly well proven. I’ve read the FBI shootout stories and glanced over the data, I understand the numbers and the justification, and I know .40 is an extremely effective SD caliber. With all that said... as a kind of old school guy I still think of .40 as a pimped out hot dog answer to a question nobody asked.

It just seems like a punk or gang banger caliber to me. I don’t want a “Glock fotay”, and I don’t want to be around “the only one who is professional enough”. I know this is all just perception and is really a little silly, but it is the way I feel.

The fact that a lot of .40 pistols were originally designed as 9mm and are therefore a little under built for the caliber doesn’t help either.

usmc1371
March 8, 2009, 06:36 AM
I love my 40. Yeah I said it I actuly like it. Glock 35. Holds as many rounds as my old bretta 92 only the rounds are bigger. Holds twice as many rounds as my 1911 but they are smaller, not by much. I still carry my 1911 cause I have faith in it but when it comes to IPSC and shooting the hell out of a pistol its a 40 glock for me. And if something went bump in the night and I endded up with my 40 not my 45 I wouldn't feel at all disadvantaged.

76shuvlinoff
March 8, 2009, 07:39 AM
I own 9mm .357 .40 and .45. The 40 is the cc and truck gun the .45 is the nightstand gun. The .357 revo is the .45's back up. The 9mm is the plinker but I'd feel good grabbing any of them for protection. I consider the .40 as the best overall for what I use it for, not the best overall period.

lesterg3
March 8, 2009, 08:03 AM
Every police officer I have talked to in SC carries a 40, and all are impressed with the caliber. I guess I feel OK having one too, if guys who potentially face BG's everyday like it.

mauiglide
March 8, 2009, 08:29 AM
I don't need/want a pistol in that caliber. My .22lr, 9mm, .357 magnum, and .45 ACP covers all that I want and need.

auberg
March 8, 2009, 08:38 AM
I've had all three major calibers. Nothing wrong truly with any of them.
I prefer the .45. The main thing between it and the .40 is the recoil. Not that the .40 is bad, but the snap that it generates is sharper to me than the push the .45 generates. I just prefer the push. To me it is easier to manage.

Just my 2 cents.

2dswamp
March 8, 2009, 09:34 AM
I'm a .40 fan. Got four pistols in .40. Primary reason for fondness is CC. I also own .357's and .45's. I have faith in all three as SD calibers, my .40's just come in smaller packaging and I'm not a fan of compact .45's. Just spoiled on full sized 1911's I guess.
The 9's sure do seem to offer a lot of pistols in a variety of sizes and I'm sure they too are ok for SD, but the gang-bangers and spray-n-pray crowd have turned me off to the caliber. Plus I just don't see the reasoning in carrying a 9 if I can carry a .40.
Put me down for a .40 fan!

Walkalong
March 8, 2009, 09:54 AM
Nothing at all wrong with the 40...I just like 45 better.Yep. I like 1911's in 9MM for cheap shooting, and the EMP is a great 9MM platform, but a 3" 1911 is only slightly larger, and can chamber the .45. The .40 is a good round, but many guns that chamber it can chamber a .45 and the .40 is as costly to reload as the .45, so .45 it is. Softer shooting too. :)

(I do have an XD SC .40 and really like it)

gruesomenewsom
March 8, 2009, 10:06 AM
I bought my .40 because it was a reasonably priced 1911, 16-rd mag capacity, and something different to shoot for a change. I love shooting my .45's, .44's and .357's, but once in a while its nice to eshoot something else for a change. It's a nice gun. I like it.

HoosierQ
March 8, 2009, 10:20 AM
If there are folks like me, I've had a 9mm for 25 years...then I got a .45...why stop in between? I suspect .40 is most popular with new owners in the last few years. Today, my observation is that new guys are going 9mm.

Galadren
March 8, 2009, 10:32 AM
I absolutely love .40. Can't stand 9mm. The bullet was meant for volume fire. It's a great round for things like sub-machine guns that can put out alot of lead fast, but for a handgun...if I'm in a situation where I might only get one shot off I want that shot to count.

.40 S&W was developed after the FBI decided they wanted something more powerful than 9mm but smaller than a full 10mm. More rounds in a magazine than .45 ACP, more power than a 9mm.

Granted I like .45 as well, but as a pistol round I just dislike 9mm.

Personal opinion, though.

kentucky_smith
March 8, 2009, 10:34 AM
I'm always going to own at least 1 Browning Hipower in 9mm and 1 1911 in .45, why do I need something in between? Had a .40 BHP, just didn't feel right. Or for you proportional analogy lovers:

9mm BHP is to .40 BHP as 2006 Jessica Simpson is to 2009 Jessica Simpson.

pbearperry
March 8, 2009, 11:01 AM
I love the 40.It is a good cal. plus it is built into pistols with frames the same size as 9mm's.In the habds of a skilled shooter,it will give great protection against a BG.

mr2guru
March 8, 2009, 11:15 AM
It's a great round....

But, IMO, it isn't fun to shoot. It's too snappy for what it is. 9mm, 10mm, .45 are far more fun to shoot.

TexasRedneck
March 8, 2009, 11:35 AM
hmmm.....guess ah'm the exception to the rule - my primary carry is a .45, BUG Colt Mustang. When the .45 is a tad large, I go for one of my .40's (yeah....ah've got more than one....or two) :D I own ONE 9 mm - it's one a friend was carrying when he was murdered years back.
IMO - and guys, please don't give me grief over this, it's only one guys' opinion ;) - the 9 mm is "too" everything.....too small to take down a junkie/adrenalin-filled perp *now* (note that after the initial love-fest, VERY few LE agencies carry the 9 mm after reviewing results), too large to be used as CC in the summer in Texas. I liken it to the 38/357 debates that were waged years back in my Dad's hardware store (when you didn't have to have all the BS to sell guns) - it became pretty evident that the .38 was gonna lose every time. But then as now, there is nothing that makes it *wrong* for you (or others) to carry a 9mm - it's simply not what _I_ will carry.

Redneck with a 40
March 8, 2009, 11:36 AM
No lack of love here, I've got two of'em, 40's.:) I find it pretty straightforward to reload, I like the way they shoot, I don't find the recoil objectionable, and the ballistics numbers on paper are very good. 9mm sized frames, only giving up a couple rounds to the 9mm and you're gaining several on the .45, what's not to like.:)

freakshow10mm
March 8, 2009, 11:55 AM
10mm was conceived as an ideal pistol cartridge by Jeff Cooper, but it was later downsized for the reasons above - and that full-house 10mm was a "hand full" to shoot.
False.

I take it you are hinting towards the FBI 10mm issue. Let me set the record straight again.

1) The FBI never tested full power 10mm.

2) The FBI never issued full power 10mm.

3) The FBI stipulation for the new cartridge selection was that the recoil of the ammo/weapon combination could not recoil more than a standard GI 1911 using standard 230gr GI ball. The 10mm test ammo was handloaded by an FBI agent to meet those requirements for the test.

4) There is an account on the S&W forums by the FBI agent who was there. Read it.

5) The cancellation of the contract with S&W had nothing to do with the 10mm cartridge (in fact it's still used by the FBI today) nor the weight of the weapon. It had everything to do with politics. The agency was training their agents to prep the trigger, which went against the design of the system, and failures occurred. The FBI whined to S&W, S&W told them to get bent and the FBI canceled the contract. It was politics.

crzoomb
March 8, 2009, 12:17 PM
I have a co-worker who is a retired captain with our local police dept.He shot a pitbull once,it took 3 rounds from a 9mm before it dropped...give me my .40 please

22lr
March 8, 2009, 12:44 PM
I would love a .40 but it would have to be a S&W 3rd gen for me to even consider it, LOL. One of these days when I have gun money again.

dispatch
March 8, 2009, 03:03 PM
As others have responded- .40 is fine, but when one has a couple, or several, pistols in .45ACP and 9mm and a stock of ammo, there is little motivation to add a new caliber.

The Lone Haranguer
March 8, 2009, 03:15 PM
Too much bark and bite in small guns for me. It is OK in a full size gun, but this is not sufficient reason for me to buy one when there are so many nice nines and .45s around.

TexasRedneck
March 8, 2009, 03:24 PM
mmm.....nope. The .40 offers significant ballistic advantages over the 9mm in my thinking. If possible, I carry a .45. If not, a .40. If not that, then my Colt Mustang.

If none of those work, then I bring a mentally-challenged friend over 6', 250 lbs with a 'tude. :D:D:D

Pizzagunner
March 8, 2009, 03:30 PM
It's a poorly conceived round that does nothing that 9mm JHPs don't already do, and .45ACP JHPs still offer more diameter, whether expansion occurs or not.

The .40S&W is still an on paper solution looking for a real world problem, just like the .357SIG and .45GAP.

P Rockwell
March 8, 2009, 03:39 PM
I suspect, like many have stated here, that the lack of popularity is because it's an in-between round. I've had two .40s in the last couple of years and sold them. I like the energy of the .45. The .40 is close enough to the .45 that, if I was going down again, I'd probably go down to a 9mm.

TexasRedneck
March 8, 2009, 03:40 PM
Bottom line - it's personal preference. I've seen results of 45's against perps, 9mm against perps, and 40 against perps. For *me*, it's 45/40/380.

Run with what does it for ya. My biggest issue w/the 9 is the cartridge speed vs. weight, which tends to induce ricochets more readily, IMO. But, hey - it's ALL your choice!

Weedy
March 8, 2009, 03:54 PM
I love the .40, I don't think the recoil is bad at all. I have a 9mm for CC, mainly because of more shots and less recoil in a small Kahr CW9. I like them both!
My father was a state trooper who carried a S&W 4006, he was being charged by a rottweiler which had already bitten him once. As it lunged toward him again he was able to draw and fire one shot. The rottie stopped, walked about 10 feet, laid down and died. Its a shame a beautiful animal had to die because of its irresponsible owner, but the .40 did its job on a very big opponent. My dad had all kinds of faith in the round after that incident.

jeff-10
March 8, 2009, 04:10 PM
9mm BHP is to .40 BHP as 2006 Jessica Simpson is to 2009 Jessica Simpson.

Well said. I bought a .40 SW BHP around 9 years ago when a major sporting goods franchise was closing all its stores. I got a great deal but thepistol has never functioned correctly. I am thinking of sending it off to Cylinder and Slide. I really wish I bought the 9mm instead.

Pilot
March 8, 2009, 04:51 PM
.380, 9MM and .45 ACP pretty much fill my need for SD guns.

30mag
March 8, 2009, 05:07 PM
I want a .40..

nksmfamjp
March 8, 2009, 05:56 PM
I love the 40. It is a great round. I would argue that other than maybe Kahr, no one has made a gun for it. Really, putting it in a 45 ACP gun is too big for it. Putting it in a 9mm gun means that the 9mm was too big. I wish someone would make like a 7/8 th's scale 1911 type gun for it. Like a officer's length frame, commander length slide, and the whole thing narrower and smaller. I think this is what is hurting the caliber the most.

Also, Glock, the coolest TV gun of all continues to ruin the 40's rep with it's poorly designed barrel design. How can we blame the 40 for these pregnant cases? Glock should man up and correct their design. Don't reload is a line of crap. I can reload these for my XD, but how many reloads does sizing the buldge cost me in case life.

There is also the FBI story. . .Which summarized for the masses says. Uh some of our officers are too weak to handle the 10, so we made the 10 short and weak. That is BS. The 10 puts more damage after the bullet exits than is needed. Only in a war like situation where down range damage is less of a concern and possible barrier penetration does the 10 supercede the 40.

I like it's ability to throw a 135 gr - 155 gr slug over 1100 fps. This is an ideal CCW round. It's diameter is at a minimum, but still seems to get the job done with good hollow points.

The 10mm is a fine round with a strong trained operator, but is really too powerful for the masses. The 45 ACP is similar in that respect. I don't know if my times would show it, but I do feel a bit faster shot to shot with a 40 vs a 45. I can shoot a 9 fastest, but I need 3 rounds to be sure I'm getting the job done. . .No thanks.

The 40 reloads well. Has a wide selection of bullets. It is accurate in the right gun and shooter.

It's a keeper for me. When will the 40 ammo be offered for $10 a box!

Bat22
March 8, 2009, 06:16 PM
I have love for the .40 S&W. :o

It's the caliber for my first handgun at the recommendation of a friend. I don't look down on the 9mm but - living in ********** - I appreciate the extra rounds I can get compared to it or the .45 ACP.

fastbolt
March 8, 2009, 06:20 PM
When I first entered LE work I thought the 'only' acceptable LE working calibers were .357 Magnum and .45 ACP. Before I entered LE work you couldn't pay me to own or shoot a 9mm pistol. The 9mm cylinder that came with my 3-screw Blackhawk .357 Magnum Convertible was never used.

It wasn't until I was required to carry an issued 9mm service weapon that my thinking started to change. I was also a bit slow to consider accepting the .40 S&W cartridge.

I waited until the .40 S&W had been in LE use for about 10 years before I decided to buy a pistol chambered in it. After having had the chance to see how well it had worked for a number of LE agencies, and seeing how my agency was considering adopting it at some point down the road, I decided it was probably about time to try a pistol in that caliber for myself.

Now, looking back on my LE career, having carried various issued weapons chambered in .357 Magnum, 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP ... I just can't get worked up much about the differences among the calibers (although being a revolver shooter I did appreciate the wheelguns). Even though I'm a long-time 1911 owner and shooter, I actually turned down an opportunity to carry an issued Colt when it was offered. I was simply more interested in a lighter weight, compact weapon because of my plainclothes assignment. If the same offer had been made earlier in my career during my younger years, though, I'd have no doubt jumped at it. ;)

Now, I just bought my 5th pistol chambered in .40 S&W. I actually own one more pistol chambered in .40 S&W than I do pistols chambered in 9mm ... and the number of pistols I own chambered in .45 ACP is now equaled by the combined number of those I own chambered in 9mm & .40 S&W. :scrutiny:

I wouldn't consider.40 S&W to be my 'favorite' when it comes to personally-owned calibers, but I do think it's proven itself to be a viable defensive caliber over the years since it's introduction. The increased recoil might not be for all owners & users, though. Then again, lots of revolver users back in the wheelgun days of LE weren't comfortable with the recoil and muzzle blast of the .357 Magnum.

FWIW, I can think of at least a couple of instances where a cop armed with a .40 S&W pistol didn't enjoy noticeably greater success with 'immediately stopping' an attacking pit bull any more quickly than other cops armed with other calibers in similar situations. Placement is still important, it seems.

I'm thinking that the smaller 9mm pistols and .38 Spl revolvers I own are still going to be my primary choices when it comes to retirement CCW weapons. My .45 ACP and .40 S&W pistols will likely remain secondary choices ... although if my new M&P 40c acquits itself as well as my full-size M&P 45 has done, it might find itself chosen more often than my other .40 S&W pistols, or even my .45 ACP pistols. It certainly has the ergonomics, balance and 'lively feel' in my hand that I find preferable. If it exhibits the same outstanding reliability and accuracy of my M&P 45, I'm thinking it just might result in my G27 being more or less retired to the safe.

Bottom line?

The .40 S&W is alive and doing very well in the LE field. When considered against the 9mm in LE service, the .40 S&W either has come to virtually equal the 9mm in service usage or has surpassed it as a choice of caliber. Talking to a couple of ammunition company LE field reps within the last few years certainly seems to indicate this trend.

The private owner preference consideration & choice is probably up for debate, especially depending on the area of the country being considered. Lots of folks express a dislike for the increased felt recoil and muzzle whip of many pistols chambered in .40 S&W.

There will likely continue to be passionate enthusiasts of different calibers ... and that's fine.

In my case it just means that I have pistols chambered in 3 center-fire calibers and revolvers chambered in 4 center-fire calibers ...

jimsmith
March 8, 2009, 06:46 PM
I have both a .40 and a .45... The .40 is very popular in my house.

420Stainless
March 8, 2009, 06:47 PM
I love the .45 more, but the .40 is good with me too. I don't care much for the 9mm. The .40S&W gives pretty much the same velocities as the 9mm with heavier bullets. Nothing wrong with the nine, but I'm at home with the other two and never really got into it.

schmeky
March 8, 2009, 09:29 PM
I was in the "would never spent my money on a .40" camp like a lot of folks. I had the .22, 9mm, and .45. What was the point? Then I bought a brand new CZ-40B from CDNN for $289.00, simply because I like CZ's and 40B was inexpensive.

Previously I had been picking up range brass and throwing away the .40 cases, but one day I started to sort and keep them. After I got the new CZ, I bought a set of dies off Ebay and started loading the .40. I now shoot the .40 over the 9mm; the .40 is a reloaders delight.

I love the .40 and would give up the 9mm if I had to chose between it and the .40. My 2 primary calibers now are .40 and .45. I'm not sure why, but I can consistently shoot the .40 more accurately than my 9mm's now. This SP-01, .40 is a joy to shoot.
http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/7061/img0841o.jpg

HexHead
March 8, 2009, 09:37 PM
I've had all three major calibers. Nothing wrong truly with any of them.
I prefer the .45. The main thing between it and the .40 is the recoil. Not that the .40 is bad, but the snap that it generates is sharper to me than the push the .45 generates. I just prefer the push. To me it is easier to manage.

Just my 2 cents.

That about sums it up, just saved me a bunch of typing. I just didn't like .40. I'm much more accurate with either 9mm or .45. :D

dbarile
March 8, 2009, 09:51 PM
Don't have a 40 yet but would like to try one when I get a chance. A local indoor range has one and I've been trying to find the time to rent it for about the past month.

I have 9mm and 45 but wouldn't mind adding another caliber to the fold.

AKElroy
March 8, 2009, 10:36 PM
I like it's ability to throw a 135 gr - 155 gr slug over 1100 fps. This is an ideal CCW round. It's diameter is at a minimum, but still seems to get the job done with good hollow points.

Try 1200 fps 165 gr Gold Dots from Doubletap; Few if any .45 loads match this combo for energy.

msiley
March 8, 2009, 11:28 PM
I love the .40!

I don't hate the others but when I was doing research on
buying my first semi-auto all signs pointed to the .40
as being a great cartridge.

GJgo
March 8, 2009, 11:58 PM
The first time I shot a 40 it was a friend's pistol, and my experience at the time was limited to my 45. I shot the 40 better, but looking back on it, my 45 was not all that great..

Later on I got a Glock 40. I thought it was a great gun, albeit a bit "snappy" vs. the "push" I was used to.

Then one day I purchased a drop-in Glock 357 Sig barrel and gave it a go. I decided I preferred it over the 40 by quite a bit, and have not gone back to the 40 since. :)

LightningMan
March 9, 2009, 12:05 AM
I don't know if it has been mentioned yet as I have not read all the posts, but I think it boils down to "Longevity". Both the 9mm & the .45acp have been around nearly 100 years and the .40S&W is just a young pup compared to them. You also must under stand that there are many guns in .45 & 9mm that are still out there being used sence the early years of production which continue to be produced to this day. The .40 has a lot of catching up to do, so it's no wonder there is more .40 S&W ammo in a merchants display case than 9mm or .45 acp. Just my 2 cents, LM.

sohcgt2
March 9, 2009, 12:32 AM
freakshow10mm responded to Zak SmithQuote:
Originally Posted by Zak Smith
10mm was conceived as an ideal pistol cartridge by Jeff Cooper, but it was later downsized for the reasons above - and that full-house 10mm was a "hand full" to shoot.

False.

I take it you are hinting towards the FBI 10mm issue. Let me set the record straight again.

1) The FBI never tested full power 10mm.

2) The FBI never issued full power 10mm.

3) The FBI stipulation for the new cartridge selection was that the recoil of the ammo/weapon combination could not recoil more than a standard GI 1911 using standard 230gr GI ball. The 10mm test ammo was handloaded by an FBI agent to meet those requirements for the test.

4) There is an account on the S&W forums by the FBI agent who was there. Read it.

5) The cancellation of the contract with S&W had nothing to do with the 10mm cartridge (in fact it's still used by the FBI today) nor the weight of the weapon. It had everything to do with politics. The agency was training their agents to prep the trigger, which went against the design of the system, and failures occurred. The FBI whined to S&W, S&W told them to get bent and the FBI canceled the contract. It was politics.

I'm curious as to how A Marine Col. opinion of a cartridge and its feasability for defensive use turns into FBI conspiracy theory. I'm also curious why it finds its way into a discussion of the favor of .40SW compared to 9mm and .45acp.

Zak Smith
March 9, 2009, 12:36 AM
I'm curious as to how A Marine Col. opinion of a cartridge and its feasability for defensive use turns into FBI conspiracy theory. I'm also curious why it finds its way into a discussion of the favor of .40SW compared to 9mm and .45acp.
Thank you, sohcgt2. It's odd that a post which didn't mention the FBI at all could be construed as being all about the FBI's history with the cartridge...

mgregg85
March 9, 2009, 01:08 AM
No need for the .40S&W while the 10mm is still around, provided you can handle more recoil than a 10 year old kid.

I'm still waiting for a 10mm XD.

earlthegoat2
March 9, 2009, 03:00 AM
Probably because its not a 9mm or a 45 and is uncommonly found in 1911s.

bondmid003
March 9, 2009, 03:36 AM
.40 is my favorite caliber thats why 2 of mine and the one on the way are all .40

newmenu
March 9, 2009, 03:55 AM
It's a poorly conceived round that does nothing that 9mm JHPs don't already do, and .45ACP JHPs still offer more diameter, whether expansion occurs or not.

The .40S&W is still an on paper solution looking for a real world problem, just like the .357SIG and .45GAP.

correct +1

Fact is, 9mm with +p rounds can hurt a BG just as bad as .40

round ---------in ----Grains -FPS --energy
9mm Para +P --0.356 -115 --1299 ---465
9mm Para +P+ 0.356 -115 ---1310 ---439
40 S&W ------0.4 --155 ----1324 ---524
.45 ACP ------0.452 -200 ---975 ----421
.45 ACP +P ---0.452 -185 ---1250 ---573

if you really want to kill a BG

use .45 +p in one of these
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e265/thezionsoho/hk45-lem.jpg

TexasRedneck
March 9, 2009, 04:55 AM
Okay....I'm confused. You SAY that the 9mm will hurt a BG as bad as a .40 - yet in the information YOU provide, you show the 40 with over 20% more energy with a projectile having 30% more weight.

How is that equal? Is that new math?

newmenu
March 9, 2009, 09:46 AM
Well TexasGenius, Im sorry, TexasREDNECK, the bullet is traveling at almost the exact same velocity and is damn near the same energy. What that means is the 9mm +p or +p+ will hurt a BG just as bad as a .40 cal but is more likely to stay in the BG and not kill the kid standing behind him.

Sounds to me like the 9mm is the better round than .40 in almost every way accept in a war application but in a war application I would rather go with .45 for obvious reasons. .40 was overhyped, over sold and is NEVER going to be as prevelent as 9mm or .45

Just One Shot
March 9, 2009, 10:16 AM
The .40 IS popular around here! There is only one place that I know of that has any ammo and it's the Fioochi brand. I own .22, .380, 9mm and .40 Cal. pistols.

MaterDei
March 9, 2009, 10:23 AM
I'll probably never own another 40. My first and only 40 was a S&W Sigma. Horrible gun. Not the cartridge's fault but after that experience I never want to touch a Sigma or a .40 again.

TexasRedneck
March 9, 2009, 10:23 AM
NewMenu - is there a reason for the provocative language? I simply looked at the information you provided, and questioned the basis of your position. With the additional mass and frontal area, the premise of overpenetration of the 40 vs. the 9 mm hasn't been shown over the results I've seen to date.
Since you are the one making such an allegation, can you point me to the studies showing such?
As I've said several times already, sometimes folks simply have a preference - for me, I prefer the 45, then the 40 based on personal experience and long-term studies of ballistics results - but I can also understand those that like the 9. I might point out, however, that most of the Law Enforcement community has gone away from the 9mm as the caliber of choice based on their own experiences....and yeah - I was active when those experiences were being learned.

TexasRedneck
March 9, 2009, 10:34 AM
MaterDei - I can understand that! My first experience with the 40 cartridge was with a Glock 22. Bear in mind that it was my first Plast-o-matic, having always shot either 1911's or wheelguns, and I frankly found that while I was deadly accurate with the gun, there was something about it I just didn't like. That colored my own opinions about the cartridge for a number of years, which is one of the reasons I don't fault others for their personal choices - because my own experience showed me that a strong dislike for a given gun can color the opinion of the cartridge as well. And before ya'll get out yet another rope, ;), let me remind you that I was VERY accurate with the gun - it was simply a personal issue I have with the gun. Know way too many folks that've carried 'em for years without a problem for me to slam 'em completely, but I'm also aware of their design issues, and as a reloader their lack of support on the cartridge base concerns me.

riccrouch
March 9, 2009, 09:58 PM
The .40 was the first auto I ever shot in any significant quantity. I have an H&K Compact 40 that I really like to shoot, and so I decided to get the Kahr CW40 as a CCW choice, simply so I didn't have to keep ammo of another caliber on hand.

All in all, I like the performance. Since I don't have much of a basis of comparison, though, not sure how much weight my opinion carries! :)

AKElroy
March 9, 2009, 10:18 PM
I'll probably never own another 40. My first and only 40 was a S&W Sigma. Horrible gun. Not the cartridge's fault but after that experience I never want to touch a Sigma or a .40 again.

Sigma was crap--I had the same experience. I am so anti-sigma, I actually cannot get my brain around an M&P even though I know logically they are completely different. Don't blame the cartridge, though.

Big Daddy Grim
March 9, 2009, 10:34 PM
The only 9's I have are CCWs and one target Glock 17L I like .40 but have always carried 1911s and all except 2 10mm's have been .45. I respect the .40 but was brought up with .45 and now that my agency went Sig I really like my new P220. So I think it's just personal preference. I still show love I may only have 2 .40's but I love them.

Skunk Pilot
March 10, 2009, 01:31 AM
Fact is, 9mm with +p rounds can hurt a BG just as bad as .40

round ---------in ----Grains -FPS --energy
9mm Para +P --0.356 -115 --1299 ---465
9mm Para +P+ 0.356 -115 ---1310 ---439
40 S&W ------0.4 --155 ----1324 ---524
.45 ACP ------0.452 -200 ---975 ----421
.45 ACP +P ---0.452 -185 ---1250 ---573

I'll add so called +P .40 S&W rounds from Buffalo Bore (http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#40sw)

155gr. Speer Uni Core @ 1300 fps (582 ft. lbs.)
180gr. Speer Uni Core @ 1100 fps (484 ft. lbs.)
180gr. FMJ @ 1100 fps (484 ft. lbs.)

I just had to do a Google search after I saw you didn't include a .40 S&W with the +P in your table (I assumed there had to be some). Only checked these guys, don't know if there are others. I have never shot them and don't plan on it, but for defense why not get it for your CCW. I have a G23C and the recoil on the .40 S&W is too much for me. I have huge neck problems so I will be getting a conversion barrel to 9mm or sell it and get a new gun (SA XDm?).

But I still think that the .40 S&W is a great all around caliber and gun combo. You get most of the stopping power of a .45 with more rounds.
----
Almost forgot, if I had more money I would get the XDm in .40 S&W and then later on get a 9mm conversion barrel for it if I wanted to have just one handgun. Of course if I had the cash I would keep my G23C and then get the XDm in 9mm. Then also a .22lr pistol so I can shoot 10 times more.

Zak Smith
March 10, 2009, 01:34 AM
Energy isn't really relevant. Penetration and wound volume are relevant.

Some years ago, I took all the FBI-protocol data I could find and put it into this spreadsheet:

http://demigodllc.com/~zak/firearms/fbi-pistol.php?sort=grade1

(sorted best to worst by average bare/clothed wound volume)

If you note, of the best rounds, 45 > 10/40 > 9mm, however.. there are plenty of 40 and 45 rounds that perform worse than the best 9mm

Weedy
March 10, 2009, 01:38 AM
"9mm +p or +p+ will hurt a BG just as bad as a .40 cal but is more likely to stay in the BG and not kill the kid standing behind him."

The over-penetration thing is SO overused and overrated, just like "knock-down power." :scrutiny:

feudalson
March 10, 2009, 02:02 AM
i now the 40. has its perks but i dont think they are worth the snappy recoil thats inheriant to the round.. imo the 9 is just as practically usefull with proper shot placement... and the ole fying ashtray is my personal favorite for defense... but like i said to me it all comes down to shot placement... a 9 has less recoil/muzzel flip which i believe give faster target aquisition which gives faster follow up shots...and that to me is the essence of a true combat round...but thats just my opinion

357sigRog
March 10, 2009, 02:04 AM
I like the .40 caliber but like the 357sig even better. I know most people like the 357sig the least of any caliber but it's my favorite.

oldFred
March 10, 2009, 02:05 AM
I personally will never entertain a .40 OR .357 SIG OR .45 GAP...

Energy and FPS DO NOT mean doodysquat... :P

Here is the proof. Yes, EVERY caliber appears to do the same damage!
(Well except those dinky 9's. Well you got 15-19 rounds so make up for it with twice as many holes!

I just personally think the .40s problem is too much energy. Too much recoil, and just as unpleasurable as a snubnose .44 mag... or a .454 casull snubby :p

V10 Viper OR I4 S2000 ?? WRONG, 440 magnum ;)

http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/wp-content/uploads/handgun_gel_comparison.jpg

71Commander
March 10, 2009, 09:48 AM
A 155 GDHP W/ 9.0 gr Longshot @ 1285 fps. That'll get your attention.:eek:

Lawnman380
March 10, 2009, 08:21 PM
Browning...my only 40...super gun

Deltaboy
March 10, 2009, 08:40 PM
I love my 40 and my 45 I carry the 40 and the 45 is my bedstand gun.

BlindJustice
March 10, 2009, 09:01 PM
Since the title didn't specify which .40 I can get away with

My only .40 is my 1911 with a Bar STo barrel chambered for
.400 CorBon 155 gr. Hornady XTP JHPs @ 1350 FPS @ .45 ACP +P pressure

WHen I get a .40 S&W it will most likely be a S&W 610 wheel gun for
the cartridge as well as 10MM AUto and Full Moon clips Maybe get one of those new 6 1/2" barreled models cut back to 5" Bbl. length.

Randall

maksim
March 11, 2009, 01:24 AM
Same with me. I love the 9mm, and love the 45. The .40 just didnt really fall in love with, esp after wasnt too thrilled shooting .40 from a walther p99. Didnt feel as good as a hk usp .45 or xd 45gap, and no where near as smooth as a beretta 92fs 9mm.

Skunk Pilot
March 11, 2009, 02:35 AM
Thanks for the link Zak Smith.

I will be going over that little by little. The more I think about it the more I want to get the XDm in 9mm. Besides it being a 9mm with less recoil it also has those 3 backstraps to choose from. My G23c just doesn't fit me as good as that one does, and I assume the medium one is installed, so the smaller one would fit even better. But I have the extended mag and slide release. Also a competition trigger which is really nice. So without these addons I would of already posted mine for sale.

In Minnesota at Bills Gun Shop and Range from April 3-5th they are having many reps from like 30 companies to see their products. Also if you buy a box of ammo you can test out their guns at the range for free. Going to go now and test out that XDm and may also try the M&P 9mm if it fits my hand (just found out the M&P has the backstraps), so I will try this one out too.

newmenu
March 12, 2009, 02:51 AM
oldFred

I personally will never entertain a .40 OR .357 SIG OR .45 GAP...

Energy and FPS DO NOT mean doodysquat... :P

Here is the proof. Yes, EVERY caliber appears to do the same damage!
(Well except those dinky 9's. Well you got 15-19 rounds so make up for it with twice as many holes!

I just personally think the .40s problem is too much energy. Too much recoil, and just as unpleasurable as a snubnose .44 mag... or a .454 casull snubby

V10 Viper OR I4 S2000 ?? WRONG, 440 magnum

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e265/thezionsoho/handgun_gel_comparison.jpg
[/QUOTE]

there you go texasredneck. I dont mean to be confrontational, but facts are facts and when someone tells me how much better .40 is for SD like they know what theyre talking about and refuse to see the truth just un-nerve me. If you want a gun for conceal carry +p+ 9mm is the best you can get, If your military or LE and you need to shoot people through cars and walls and body armor then go .45 or .357 sig or FN 5.57
.40 is overhyped, oversold and a go between round that does not do better than 9mm for personal defense or .45/.357sig/5.57 for offense.

NotSoFast
March 12, 2009, 03:09 AM
In the brief time I have been with THR, I see very little love for the .40 S&W. Lot's of support for 9's, .45's. If the eternal debate is for the 9 for its capacity vs. the .45 for its take down power, does anyone share my view that the .40 pretty much silences this debate? Energy numbers that match or exceed our pet .45 loads, capacity maybe -1 vs. the common 9's. Where's the love for the shorty .40?
You were going along fine until you mentioned 'shorty'. :neener:

I just upgraded to a Glock 35. With it I bought a 9mm conversion barrel. Last weekend, having shot both in the same pistol, I can definitely tell the difference in loads between 9mm and .40 S&W. I've also run an energy calculator on those two and the .45. The .40 beats everything in semi-auto except the 10mm. And it's close to the .357 in muzzle energy as well.

What's NOT to like about the .40? :D

TexasRedneck
March 12, 2009, 09:16 AM
What's NOT to like about the .40?

Apparently for some, it's got too much recoil, and disturbs their inner peace...... :D:D:D:D:

Skunk Pilot
March 19, 2009, 03:30 AM
If I did ever get a .40 again, I would get an all metal gun. That should help with some of the recoil. If I had enough money something that is like a Sprinfield EMP. Or maybe something a little bit bigger.

frogomatic
March 19, 2009, 03:39 AM
it's pretty simple...cost

.40 costs more than either 9mm or 45acp

Skunk Pilot
March 19, 2009, 03:41 AM
.40 costs more than .45 ? I didn't know that. Well that is a good reason.

EHL
March 19, 2009, 05:11 AM
for me, I don't like the recoil. Not that I'm a recoil sensitive guy, but the .45 is a time proven man stopper-why would I trade the great trigger pull and ease of aiming with my 1911 for a Johnny come Lately snappy shooting 40S&W? It may be a good man stopper, but like others have said. I don't think it solves any serious faults of the old war horse 45acp or the 9mm.

johnnylaw53
March 19, 2009, 08:08 AM
Do I remember right? Didn't the .40 come about after the FBI shootout in Fl? After the post shooting investigation the FBI said thier agents were out gunned and began looking at the 10 mm and even purchase some but soon found that the recoil was too much for the average agent. The .40 came out as a reduce load also a little shorter and could be make in the same size weapon the 9mm was in. Wasn't it design to have almost the round count of the 9mm and almost the so call punch of the .45?

Bionicrooster
March 19, 2009, 10:31 AM
Sounds to me like the 9mm is the better round than .40 in almost every way accept in a war application but in a war application I would rather go with .45 for obvious reasons. .


Your reasoning is astounding. :rolleyes:

I recently bought a 40, after looking around I chose it becuase most 45's were too bulky, and after talking to a friend in LE who talked about how his dept went to 40 from 9mm like alot of others I decided to shoot both. The 9 was nice and if I was recoil shy I might have bought it, but the 40 just felt much better. I don't think there is a lack of love for it, when I bought mine most of what I read indicated it was very popular round that was getting more popular as rounds like the 10mm and 45GAP became less and less poplular.

gmh1013
March 19, 2009, 12:05 PM
Ammo to expensive
9mm in bulk very cheap
main reason
I will pass and goto 45ACP

esq_stu
March 19, 2009, 12:14 PM
That's why.

If the army carried it;

If the stopping power was a lot greater than .45 or 9mm;

If my local PD carried it;

If it was cheaper than 9mm;

If it was an official NATO round carried by most of the world's militaries;

If you could pack as many rounds as 9mm in the most popular handguns;

If it had been around since WWI;

If if if . . .

But there's nothing wrong with it.

Plinkeriffic
March 19, 2009, 01:35 PM
Friend of mine is sold on the Springfield XD-M .40 Can't say I blame him. 17 rounds in a match-grade pistol for six bills? Dang!

Almost makes me wish I hadn't picked up an XD45T; almost... Which, btw, will shoot darn near anything chambered for it so it is fairly cost-effective to shoot; fairly...

ArmedBear
March 19, 2009, 01:52 PM
Almost makes me wish I hadn't picked up an XD45T; almost...

Sums it up right there.

ALMOST:)

Revolver Ocelot
March 26, 2009, 01:20 AM
I was wondering the same thing earlier, I was looking at the springfield emp and notice they are both the same overall size and the only real difference on that end is one weighed one once more.

Yet no one seems to want the 40s&w version.

I'd figure that if you're buying an emp you'd want to get as close as you can to 45 acp power while maintaining the small size of the emp, and the 40 would do just that.

also on speers website the ballisitics tables for the 40 vs. the 45 are nearly identical, thats alot to love in my opinion.

Dr.Rob
March 26, 2009, 01:57 AM
I just never found the caliber and platforms significantly interesting to me to ADD to my battery of 9mm and 45. I was tempted once by the Colt Z40 (a Colt-CZ venture) but it just looked... odd. Should have got it, few were made it's a collector's item now.

WardenWolf
March 26, 2009, 01:59 AM
The .40 has an unusual problem in that the bullet can be pushed back into the casing when chambered roughly, resulting in a severe overpressure scenario. It's otherwise a very good round, just one that you shouldn't treat as roughly as a 9mm or .45. Unfortunately, many of the guns chambered in this round (Glocks) are inherently ill-suited to handling the additional pressure. Most other guns won't have a problem, but if this happens to a Glock you'll be in the market for a new gun.

LoneStarWings
March 27, 2009, 11:13 PM
I like my .40 a lot. To me it recoils less than the .45, and packs a litte more punch than the 9mm. The .40 is fun to shoot, and with good ammo plenty effective IMO (180gr Federal HST's). I use a S&W M&P .40, and while I admitedly have little experience and have never used it for anything other than target practice, I really enjoy the pistol and the payload.

Choclabman
March 28, 2009, 09:49 AM
Over the years, I have traded for two pistols chambered on the .40S&W. A Glock G23 and a P229. I did not like the .40S&W in either pistol, and they were traded again.

I have tried the .40S&W, and prefer the 9mm and .45ACP.

Bionicrooster
March 28, 2009, 11:18 AM
Just had a friend try out a 45, 40 and 9mm, and he decided on the 40. I think many new buyers gravitate to the 9mm and 40, but there are still tons of people out there with 9's and 45's so the 40 just hasn't reached the volume level yet. Most of the LE around here have also switched to 40 in recent years.

krs
March 28, 2009, 12:21 PM
It's much simpler than all of this. I don't have a .40 because Colts don't come in .40.

afvoo52
March 28, 2009, 12:42 PM
Because ssooo many people spent SSOOO much money on the 9mm and the 45ACP, now comes along the PERFECT cartridge. These folks don't want to either admit the 40 is the meat in the sandwich, or they are in denial lol. The 40 is a very good round, many law enforcement agencies have switched and due to exhaustive ballistics testing.

The 40 is the best compromise between power and recoil. The 45 has more recoil than the 40 and for some people isn't manageable, yet the 40 has more stopping power than the 9mm, though the advantage be ever so slight between all 3, that with proper shot placement they are equal. One isn't any deader shot with a 45 than with a 9 or 40. The 45 is an excellent defensive round but in most guns capacity is limited to 7-8. The 40 has a good compromise of capacity between the 9mm and 45acp and it can still remain concealable and controllable for most.

I own about an equal amount of guns chambered in 9mm,40S&W, and 45acp. My carry gun for winter is a 40 and my t-shirt summer gun is a 9mm. The honest truth is NONE are any good if you can't shoot accurately. Some feel the 45 is best with poor hits verses the 40 and 9 and I don't disagree, but if they aren't incapacitated they can still KILL YOU 45 or not! while others feel more secure with the higher capacity of some the 9mm's and faster followup shots. then we have the male anatomy issue, bigger gun equals, well bigger gun, these are the guys buying Enzyte from smiling Bob.


Folks they are ALL good cartridges and it comes down to preference, they will ALL fail with poor shots, and they will ALL succeed with proper shot placement, especially with today's advanced ammo. The real issue is people like to argue and this debate will go on for ever. I have yet to see a grave marker say, I wish I had been shot with a 40S&W or 9mm rather than a 45.

Mr_Rogers
March 28, 2009, 01:18 PM
I never liked the 40S&W because I could never find a gun in the caliber that I enjoyed. Somehow, the round seems to emphasize all of the design faults in a pistol (and I include H&Ks, Sigs, S&W and Glocks). Then I found the humble Stoeger (Beretta) Cougar. This changed my mind completely and I now shoot the 40S&W frequently.

I have always thought that a hand-loaded 40S&W is a very good carbine round.

drtee
March 28, 2009, 02:09 PM
I prefer 45 first and 40 second. Do not own a 9.

possum
March 28, 2009, 03:37 PM
i love my .40's as a matter of fact that is all that i own. i have so many reloading components, ammo etc, there is no reason for me to go any other way, and it keeps things simple. one caliber for all my handguns.

sinistr
March 29, 2009, 12:56 AM
when new shooters ask me about what caliber is best for sd i like to take a .40,9mm,and a .45 round and have them hold them in their hand, together.and ask them what they would least like to get shot by.(they usually pick .45)simplistic i know:rolleyes:.concerns of "stopping power" and over penetration are mosty academic.same goes for recoil,for 99%of shooters this shouldn't be a problem.train correctly and develop the proper mindset,and any of these calibers will be effective.i practice with the 9 and carry the .40,i would feel safe with either one.i'd prefer the .45 but i pack a glock and their just too big to cc for me.btw... isn't bullet set back in the .40 caused by repeatedly ejecting and rechambering the same round?and what about+p .40's in glock,is that safe?

AcceptableUserName
March 29, 2009, 01:00 AM
In my opinion it's significantly more expensive (in my area at least) and harder to find than .45 or 9mm. It's a cool caliber in a lot of ways, but it just feels to in-between for me. Maybe that's a good thing, dunno. Just my .02

Knightrider03m
March 29, 2009, 01:38 AM
I love my 9 and wouldn't get a .40. I like to hit my target with every bullet lol. I would get a .45 for home defense but that is as far as I would go. It sucks that pretty soon, I would be going in to the police force and will be forced to use a .40.

ThrottleJockey
March 29, 2009, 01:44 AM
I love my .40 even more than my .45 and I just can't even make myself think about buying a 9mm. Well, the ammo price made me think about the 9mm once, I'm really glad I resisted the urge, I hate them and the stigmata that goes with them.http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m135/AxA_04/3nd3p83l1ZZZZZZZZZ91r972bab900c3d18.jpg

Zerodefect
March 29, 2009, 11:20 AM
Everything here seems to point to that the .40 has better power when it hits someone.....but how deos it move from target to target? Follow up shots? Isn't it considerably slower aiming due to the extra recoil??

If you have 3 targets instead of one, is the 9mm the better choice, based on recoil, not capacity?

Omaha-BeenGlockin
March 29, 2009, 02:06 PM
Owned a couple .40's---never again.

1. Funky snappy recoil.
2. Way more expensive than 9mm
3. Loss of capacity--generally gives up 4 shots to a 9mm in the same sized magazine.
4. Strange recoil leads to poor follow up shots----the .45 is way easier to shoot.

The .40 is just an abomination.

.cheese.
March 29, 2009, 02:10 PM
I have 12 handguns chambered for .40S&W. None in 9mm. None in .45.

The only other calibers I use are .22lr, .38 special, and 5.56mm.

My semi-auto handgun caliber of choice is .40. No lack of love here.

jocko
March 29, 2009, 03:54 PM
stigma???humm never heard of that women and pansies crap before. I guess I'm one of them, for I love my 9's all 4 of them. wanna stand in front of one?????

Pretty weak minded individuals to let some stupid ass phrase govern your buying habits...

TexasRedneck
March 29, 2009, 04:07 PM
Geez, guys - give it a REST! If you like the .40, that's cool. If you hate it, that's okay too. It's about what YOU like - not me or anyone else.

I have my own reservations about the 9mm vs. 10, 40, 45 an' 357. To me, it's more in line w/a .38 in terms of a LITTLE light to get the job done as *I* see it - but lots of folks have been killed with 'em (as they have with many of the .2x calibers!!).
If you have a specific like/dislike, that's cool. If you want to offer specific talking points/view points - that's cool too. I just don't see the need for name calling an' such, myself.

.cheese.
March 29, 2009, 04:48 PM
Well, the ammo price made me think about the 9mm once, I'm really glad I resisted the urge, I hate them and the stigmata that goes with them.

Owners of 9mm start exhibiting the crucifixion wounds of Jesus?

:neener:

I think you meant to say stigma.

Or maybe you were making a joke and I missed it. :uhoh:

SharpsDressedMan
March 29, 2009, 06:31 PM
I think the .40 was created for people who could not shoot the 10mm or the .45 (wasn't it based on the watered down FBI 10mm ballistics, created because many agents feared full house 10mm?). I do not suffer from that problem, so the 10mm and .45 are just plain better cartridges for me.

Autolycus
March 29, 2009, 07:27 PM
Its just more expensive then 9mm for me. I am on a tight budget but I have no real reservations with the .40 S&W though I prefer to shoot 9mm.

TexasRedneck
March 29, 2009, 08:09 PM
<snicker> I shoot 45's routinely, didn't care for the 10...own several 40's, which I find interesting ballistically w/regards to penetration potential vs. the 10 or 9's.

Oh - and I've also been known ta put a few .500's down range, as well - so much for yer "people who could not shoot the 10mm or the .45" theory.:D:D:D

Bionicrooster
March 29, 2009, 08:26 PM
Owned a couple .40's---never again.

1. Funky snappy recoil.
2. Way more expensive than 9mm
3. Loss of capacity--generally gives up 4 shots to a 9mm in the same sized magazine.
4. Strange recoil leads to poor follow up shots----the .45 is way easier to shoot.

The .40 is just an abomination

No offense meant but you mention the recoil twice in 4 points, I guess 40 recoil is alot for women or small men but for most people I don't think the 40 is a punishing round:confused:, maybe because my other handgun is a 44 mag. As for being way more expensive, I live in NJ and even here 40 ammo is not alot, if I couldn't afford to buy ammo I would probably think about picking up another hobby....

M&PVolk
March 29, 2009, 08:32 PM
I LOVE the .40. I find it hilarious that many complain about the recoil, I'm not sure how old they are, but I'm in my mid-30's and have never shot anything shy of a .44 mag that I thought had any significant recoil. Ironic, because I am on the smaller side of things. I can easily get follow up shots and multiple targets with the .40. In fact, during my CCW class, I outshot 9mm style 1911's.

IMHO, the .40 offers the best BALANCE of all the handgun cartridges out there. To me, the 9mm is underwhelming, no matter how cheap the ammo. The .45 is great, but has no purpose in my lineup that the .40 doesn't fill perfectly. More capacity than a .45 with nearly or equivalent stopping power, all in a smaller frame gun that is lighter and easier to conceal. It is having your cake and eating it, too.

The cartridge itself is easily re-loaded and is amazingly versatile, shooting from 135 grain to 180 grain rounds with outstanding velocity. Once purchased, I can't envision the need for 9mm or .45. The .40 does it all. If I need bigger than the .40, I skip autoloaders and go straight to my other favorite handgun round, the .44 magnum. If I want smaller for pocket carry, a J-Frame is outstanding with .38+p. I will concede that I do occasionally utilize the .380, but that is EXCLUSIVELY based on pistol size and form factor. I never truly feel comfortable with it, and it is my wife's gun.

Honestly, I understand people skipping the .40 because of what they already own, but anyone who hates on the cartridge is either overly recoil sensitive or just doesn't want to accept that modern ammunition advances have lessened the appeal of the old stalwarts...

lesterg3
March 30, 2009, 01:55 PM
Everyone has an opinion, and each should be respected for their opinions.

I am 59, and partially paralyzed and absolutely love my 40.

I don't feel any snap or excess recoil, and find it a great shooter, and very accurate, but that is just me.

Each person needs to find the firearms that they feel the most comfortable with, if you are not comfortable with it then you will lack confidence in it, and thusly will never be happy.

So I have the following that I am very happy and comfortable with:
.357 mag revolver
38 special revolver
9 mm pistol
40 cal pistol

and, I am looking forward to the time when I can afford to buy a 1911 .45, and a 44 mag revolver.

To each their own, and God bless.

10-Ring
March 30, 2009, 02:43 PM
I owned several platforms in 40 & have shot 1000's of rounds through those & others. I just couldn't warm up to it -- I much preferred shooting my 9's & 45's

SsevenN
March 30, 2009, 04:07 PM
I own four 9mm(Steyr M9-A1, CZ 2075 RAMI, Kahr CW9, CZ 75 SP-01), one .40S&W(H&K USP), one 10mm(Tanfoglio Witness Match), and one 5.7(Erm, FN 57 :)).

To me it's all about your personal prefrence.

(IMHO)Any defensive situation is going to be very fast and fluid, no static paper punching involved. I figure, if I'm ever shooting to save my life, chances are I'm going to be moving and shooting at the same time, as fast a possible.

I have tested my ability to maintain accuracy while moving and rapidly shooting, off handed, left handed, two handed, from the hip, laying down, behind cover, etc etc. (excluding my 5.7, not what I would consider a defensive pistol.)

In the end, the targets with the most center of mass shots are my 9mms.

That, at least for me, was the deciding factor. I figure if I need to score hits, fast, I should use the platform that encourages those kind of results.

Historian
March 30, 2009, 05:28 PM
I own only one handgun..an S&W .40 M&P. No displeasure here. Sure it snaps on recoil but, if I am holding it correctly, the barrel comes right back down to the target for the second shot. I really don't have anything to compare it against since I have fire a 9mm and a .45 only a few times. But it is plenty of gun for me...for target shooting and HD.
IMHO.

Historian

Erik
March 30, 2009, 08:57 PM
No love? Where? State-side, at least, it is very popular, and seemingly more so each year.

gmh1013
March 30, 2009, 09:13 PM
I like 9mm SIG's cause of the 15 round clips. I can shoot heavy 158
Subsonics if I want.
I like .38 revolvers for a CWP gun.
Love .357 Colt King Cobra's for H/D
Really LOVE .45 Colts and SIG's
But the .40 never did it for me, I just dont see much place for it IMHO

TexasRedneck
March 30, 2009, 09:32 PM
Spent part of the afternoon at the range "shootin' in" mah "new" Randall. Yeah - found one NIB that had NEVER been fired. It was purty finicky the first hunnert rounds, but got pretty good on the second hunnert.

Guy I bought it from was proud it'd never been fired. Ah was tempted ta ask him if he wanted his wife ta be a virgin on their 25th anniversary, too. :D:D:D

mesinge2
March 30, 2009, 09:42 PM
I have come to the same general conclusions as above. I have some pistols and revolvers in both 9mm and .45 ACP, but I generally carry either my Beretta 92 9mm or my .44Mag Revolver. I have nothing really against the .40; I just don't need one.

Air,Land&Sea
March 30, 2009, 09:49 PM
The only way someone will get my .40's is from my cold dead hands.

TexasRedneck
March 30, 2009, 09:52 PM
Oh, they kin have any one of mah 40's....after ah've emptied the other 4 at 'em....an' the 6 45's....the 357's...etc. :D

AKElroy
March 30, 2009, 11:25 PM
1. Funky snappy recoil.
2. Way more expensive than 9mm
3. Loss of capacity--generally gives up 4 shots to a 9mm in the same sized magazine.
4. Strange recoil leads to poor follow up shots----the .45 is way easier to shoot.

Really did not expect to see this much conversation about recoil when I started this thread. I suspect the notion that .45's gently push while .40's snap has more to do wth the plastic guns the .40's are generally loaded for. I have never found the recoil of my .40's to be any more punishing than my .45, but it is a 40 + oz series 80. Recoil is simple physics; action = identical opposite reaction. You can't have energy figures similar to a .45 w/out recoil similar to a .45's in a gun of similar weight. Second, .40's typically lose 1 to 2 rounds capacity to a 9 of similar size, not 4. What is radically limited is the capacity of a typical .45 to a .40 or 9 of similar size.

TexasRedneck
March 31, 2009, 12:03 AM
I've been kinda puzzled by the recoil comments mahself. Ya are likely headed down the right trail with the plastic gun thoughts - while being lighter is fine, the loss of weight also increases the perceived recoil. I've got 4 or 5 .40's, and the only one I didn't care for was the Glock - which has since left the corral. Even that wasn't so much recoil as it was that it just never felt "right" in my mitts. Always felt like I was spoonin' my sister when I shot it.... ;)

drtee
March 31, 2009, 12:54 AM
Recoil is a terribly subjective issue. Some folks are not bothered by the recoil of the most powerful of guns. Weight of the piece is extremely important. The heavier the gun, less felt recoil and the lighter weight of another gun equals more felt recoil. There are very few that want to carry around three, four or five pounds on their hip, or shoulder; or ankle for that matter. Some people are just more sensitive to recoil than others. Therefore: subjectivity enters the equation.

Since the subject about recoil on these pages is not quantifiable here, we have to accept that some will be ok with a given level of recoil and others will not be happy with the same level. There are charts that can be found as to measured actual recoil. Sorry I don't recall where any of the charts are located. I'm sure some who read this will have that information.

I advise all my students to acquire THE gun they are happy with and learn to shoot it to the best of their ability. Other guns can be added later.

I can't say I love any gun but the .40 S&W caliber is one of my favorites.

Just some thoughts from someone trying to learn from those more knowledgeable than myself.

I'm done now.:D :what:

AKElroy
March 31, 2009, 01:26 AM
Spent part of the afternoon at the range "shootin' in" mah "new" Randall. Yeah - found one NIB that had NEVER been fired. It was purty finicky the first hunnert rounds, but got pretty good on the second hunnert.

If that Randall is a lefty, then I am seriously jealous.

AKElroy
March 31, 2009, 01:47 AM
In the end, the targets with the most center of mass shots are my 9mms.

I shoot one ragged hole @ 50 yds w/ my scoped .22 22/45. Doesn't mean I rely on it for defense. I too shoot my 92 9mm better than my .40's; although both shoot center mass, the .40 is clearly more effective. I doubt I will be measuring groups in the center mass of an actual perp should it ever come to the gravest extreme. Bragging groups are irrelevant for an HD weapon. Softball or even larger size groups are more than sufficient @ 7 yrds.; once that basic hurdle is cleared, then load effectiveness and reliability are the only relevant questions left. And for the record, hasn't the .40 all but dominated competition shooting? The accuracy potential is clearly there.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why the lack of love for the .40?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!