What's wrong with .40S&W?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been shooting a 1911 clone chambered in .45 for the past 10 years or so and just recently bought a CZ 75B in Satin Nickel chambered for .40 S&W (can you tell I like to brag about my new gun?) and I shot it for the first time this past weekend alongside my .45 and I like them both. The .45 has a bit more kick than the .40 but not so much that it bothers me. The thing I do like about my .40 over the .45 is the fact that I have a 10 round clip in it compared to 7 in the .45. I'm not worried about gunfights that much (hopefully), but the 10 round clip just makes for a little bit more enjoyable shooting.
 
.45 shooters are used to a BOOM and muzzle rise with quite controllable recoil over a slow impulse.

.40SW has a much more abrupt and sharper recoil. I find it less pleasant than .45. However, it is still fun to shoot and cheaper to feed than .45.
 
I have a CZ P-01 in 9 mm and a H&K P2000 in 40 S&W and I notice no more recoil in the .40 than I do the 9, there equally the same in recoil....
And I believe the .40 weighs a little less than the 9... which I would think gives the 9 a less recoil advantage over the 40 but it doesnt.....drf
 
I hate .40Short&Weak. You want a .40 caliber round? Get a 10mm Auto and we'll talk.

10mm Auto is the absolute BEST autoloading cartridge EVER!!!

I reserve some of my most vile hatred for the .40Short&Weak.
 
P&R, you shouldn't hold back like that. Let us know how you REALLY feel ;)

The biggest problem with the 10mm is the platforms it's available in. I want the capacity of the Glock 20 with the feel and trigger of the CZ 97B but until the AWB sunsets I don't think CZ will even consider making one. Sure I could get the Witness, but I like the fit and finish on the CZs better so I'm holding out for a bit longer.

I have a Delta Elite which I like. The big heavy chunk of steel does a great job of taming the recoil after a few modifications. But I can shoot my akward little RAMI faster and more accurately at 15 yards against 5" plates. The extra power of the 10mm doesn't do me a lot of good if I can't get it on target.

When I do hit with the 10mm, even with the light 135 grainers, the plates go down with authority. I certainly wouldn't want to be on the recieving end of one . . . of course I could say the same about a Short and Weak ;)
 
I'm Curious About the Recoil

I've never shot a .40 so I don't know. I have seen several comments here about 'sharp recoil', 'snappy recoil', and 'not fun to shoot'. I've been considering a .40, but I shoot 150 to 200 rds a week (.45 ACP). I have fun shooting and I don't want to invest in something 'not fun to shoot'. Comments?
 
ezypikns, my suggestion would be as follows:

1) find a friend close that has one and get him to let you shoot it,
2) failing that, get yourself down to DFW Gun Range (I noticed where you are from). They have all sort of guns to rent and they even have a CZ 75B there for rental (I'm sure they have other .40's as well). And no, I'm not associated with them, I was just planning on making the trip there myself to try out the CZ before I bought it, but the money lept out of my pocket and into the dealers hand before I made it down there. Luckily, I don't have any regrets.
 
ezypikns, I think you'd just have to try it. What doesn't bother me seems to bother some people a lot. Some people evidently can't even give a good reason why they don't like the 40 S&W.

If you shoot 45 ACP quite a bit, I don't think you will have any problem with 40 S&W. I have a CZ-97 (in 45 ACP) and it is a fine firearm, but it has quite a bit of sharp recoil. Much more than a 9mm. Now I can shoot it just fine and it doesn't bother me, it IS a 45 ACP after all. The 40 S&W is less so than a 45 ACP. So you should be fine. Of course a heavier pistol will help too, steel vs alloy.

When I shoot one of these pistols that has more recoil (357 mag, 45 ACP, etc), I just let my wrist and forearm act more like a spring, letting it rise just a little bit to absorb the recoil and then quickly re-aim. It's a quick, controlled motion and it is very natural. I do not try and keep 100% stiff-armed and absorb the recoil with no movement in my wrist and forearm. That would be annoying and tiresome. I don't have any problem with these calibers. They are a piece of cake compared to my 8mm mil-surp mausers. Man, now those kick like mules!
 
Black Snowman,

True enough about getting shot. Hell, I don't wanna get shot by a BB gun, let alone anything "serious".

As far as platforms, yes the double column G20 is a bit big for my hands, but my single-stack 1076 fits perfectly.

The recoil can be a bit much in full-house loads, but the beauty of 10mm is you can download it to .40S&W velocities or crank it up to light .41 Magnum territory. It's extremely versatile. I for one, actually enjoy recoil, and like full-house 10mm.
 
Yeah, recoil is extremely subjective... I've shot lots of 9mm and 45ACP and in general, I think folks that are completely comfortable with 45ACP won't fear 40S&W in a platform such as the SIG 229 or the Glock 23, but it is sharper than pretty much any 45 I can recall shooting. It's also a higher pressure cartridge so there is usually quite a bit of muzzle flash and a louder report than with 45ACP, esp in standard pressure 230 grain form. I don't have anything against 40S&W but will admit that the sound of it (along with the 357 SIG) almost has a concusive effect, much more offensive than the 9mm or 45ACP.

I'd agree that you should check it out yourself because all the words any of us write still won't tell you if you will enjoy it.
 
I have a Springfield XD-40, personally I think it one of the best pistols on the market to using the .40 S&W platform. I can have a total of 11 rounds of ammo in the gun with standard capacity mags. It feels great, has had no explosions that I know of like other pistols some compare to it.

Those that say the kick is bad, I say bull hockey, strengthen your wrist. Obviously theses folks haven't been shooting revolvers in .357 Mag before because the 40 S&W has lighter recoil than it does in the proper gun.

40 S&W Winchester 165gr SXT
Velocity (fps) 1130
Energy (ft. lbs.) 468


40 S&W Winchester 155gr Silvertip
Velocity (fps) 1205
Energy (ft. lbs.) 500
----------------------------------------------------------------



9mm Winchester 124gr FMJ
Velocity (fps) 1140
Energy (ft. lbs.) 358


9mm Winchester 115gr Silvertips
Velocity (fps) 1225
Energy (ft. lbs.) 383
-------------------------------------------------------------------------



.45 ACP Winchester 185gr Silvertips
Velocity (fps) 1000
Energy (ft. lbs.) 411


.45 Winchester 230gr SXT
Velocity (fps) 880
Energy (ft. lbs.) 396


It all boils down to throwing a larger diameter than the 9MM and throwing it as fast or faster and providing more energy. You are also throwing it faster than the .45 and and providing as many ft lbs of energy as well. But it isn't a 45 caliber bullet either. Personally, I think it's a terrific compromise in the right gun and, I find it to be very possibly the better cartridge in the right gun. The Sig Pro isn't a bad choice for the 40 S&W either.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why people don't like .40 "because it isn't a 10mm", "because its short and weak compared to 10mm", blah...

Well, obviously. It wasn't designed to compete against the 10mm or make 10mm power levels. It was made to compete against 9 and .45, and it does that quite well. So well, in fact, that with 10mm and .40 around, I see about zero "need" for .45 at all, and very little for 9mm. At least with 9mm, you get some additional capacity over .40, but .45 has virtually no measureable advantage against 40S&W ballistically, it is more expensive, and it has lower capacity. And if you want more power than a normal service handgun round, well, reach for your 10mm.

Just my .02...
 
"However, it is still fun to shoot and cheaper to feed than .45"

Spartacus, how do you figure that? .45 ACP brass is all over the place, including some razor sharp deals on once-fired. Plus I shoot tons of my own cast .45 230's... straight wheelweights work fine. Not sure I'd use cast ammo in a .40... certainly not in a Glock. :eek: And there's all manner of jack-cheap surplus for .45, some of it excellent GI stuff.

Having said all that, though... the round DOES have an appeal to me. If I go for it, I'd buy the Smith 4006, I think.

best,
StrikeEagle
 
ttadboy,

There's about as much energy difference between .40 and .45 as there is between 9mm and .40., between 30 and 40 ft lbs or about 5%. The capacity difference between them is also equally distributed. In Glock full size guns, the 21 holds 13 rounds of .45, the 22 holds 15 rounds of .40, and the 17 holds 17 rounds of 9mm. Even H&Ks USP full size holds 12 rounds of .45, 13 rounds of .40, and 15 rounds of 9mm. The increase in energy and decrease in capacity is nearly perfectly linear from 9mm to .40 to .45.

Even by your logic, if you can see an energy gain worth the capacity decrease for using .40 over 9mm, then you must be able to see it for .45 over .40 as it is roughly the same trade off. And if you see a capacity gain worth the energy decrease for .40 over .45, then you also must see it for 9mm over .40. Therein would be the need.

And by your final logic of cost and capacity, 9mm is the clear winner there. You may like the .40 round, but a magic sword it is not.

"I don't understand why people don't like .40 "because it isn't a 10mm", "because its short and weak compared to 10mm""

The reason people compare it is because the .40 was developed based on a 10mm with low performance. I believe it was the FBI looking for a round and specified a 10mm with lower performance characteristics than 10mm is capable of. The manufacturer decided they could achieve this with a shorter round using small pistol brass and primers as opposed to the beefier brass and primer of the 10mm. It is the DIRECT result of a 10mm. So it was designed to compete with 10mm because the 10mm competes with 9mm and .45.
 
The hottest loads commercially available (to my knowledge):

9mm: Corbon 125gr @ 1250fps = 434 ft/lb.
.40: GA GD 155gr @1200fps = 496 ft/lb.
**.40: GA GD 155gr @1300fps = 582 ft/lb.**
.45: GA GD 185gr @1100fps = 497 ft/lb.
10mm: DT GD 155gr @1500+fps = 774 ft/lb. (5" barrel)

Are there hotter .45 loads out there that I am missing?

I know many people don't like the "+P" .40 loads because they are worried about KBs. Even if you exclude the hottest .40 load out there, it seems to me that .40 and .45 are VERY close in terms of maximum energy, and in guns that I'd be carrying, the .40 has a 4 round capacity advantage. Also, 10mm easily smokes the whole feild and is in a different power class entirely, IMO. Thus my statements in my previous post to the effect that in autoloading handgun calibers, .40 has got you covered in the service cartridge range, and 10mm has you covered in the mega-power range. Heck, its even a good logistical decision since you can load the exact same bullets in both cartridges if you are so inclined. Like I said, 9mm is also good as an effective round for the recoil shy, subguns, very high capacity, very low cost, etc. But .45 just doesn't have much of anything on .40 in my estimation. But to each their own.
 
When I bought my first handgun, I told the guy at the gun shop that I wanted a Glock or H&K and something in 9mm, .40, or .45. He picked up one of each (6 guns) and took me into the range to shoot them all.

I knew very little about guns, but I formed my opinion of .40 on that day when he asked me what I thought. I said, "It has more recoil than the .45, but without all of the power." He smiled and laughed. It's taken several years for me to realize why he found that so amusing.
 
40 S&W popularity is of the anomalies that appear on this board from time to time. It is exceptionally popular in the real world and a fine cartridge. Just the people here tend to form a group opinion about certain things and by reading the posts on this board you would think the 10mm is actually more popular than the 40 cal. It is not.
 
I've never seen anyone come anywhere near claiming that 10mm is more popular than .40. I've seen many claims about 10mm being superior to .40. I tend to agree. And many of the people here are basing this on experience rather than a group mentality as you have said. I don't like the .40 because of how it shoots. You would be correct in assuming from this that I have fired several .40s. I've also shot several 9mms, 10mms, .45s, .357 sigs, .380s, .32s, .357 mags, .38s, .44s, .454s, .45 long colts, .41 mags, .500 s&w (one), and probably some I haven't listed. My dislike of .40 is based on experience, not conference opinion. I think you'll find that this is the case. I'm sorry if people don't like the round that you do. But that's just life.
 
What's wrong with .40 S&W???

KABOOOOOM!!!











Oh, settle down, I'm kidding.

I have nothing really against it, but I've found that it's one of my least favorite calibers to shoot. It seems to have neither of the redeeming recoil characteristics of 9mm (small, quick snap) or .45 ACP (slow, moderate push).

In other words, it's got some of the least comfortable recoil out there, IMO. However, I think that could be counteracted by having the right pistol for the round.

Wes
 
Let's just take the normal non +P factory load I posted:

40 S&W Winchester 155gr Silvertip
Velocity (fps) 1205
Energy (ft. lbs.) 500


Compare them to the factory .45 Winchesters in Silvertip and SXT both, it smokes them.

.45 ACP Winchester 185gr Silvertips
Velocity (fps) 1000
Energy (ft. lbs.) 411


.45 Winchester 230gr SXT
Velocity (fps) 880
Energy (ft. lbs.) 396


Why loose round capacity to receive a lesser performing cartridge?

OR you could say.....

Why take the gain in performance to receive a smaller diameter cartridge?


Either will work but, the .40S&W is indeed the best of both 9mm and 45acp worlds.
 
For me, the fact that good .45 ACP reloads are much more readily available than .40 S&W reloads, means I'm going to be shooting the SW1911 more often. When my friend has his .45 ACP 200 gr SWC reloads in stock, they are the same price as .40 S&W Blazer Brass at Wal Mart.

When I can get my hands on these reloads, that is where my money is going, and that is what I will be shooting more often.
 
The original question wasn't, "What's wrong with the 40S&W compared to the 10mm?"

If you want to compare it, it obviously has some benefits and shortcomings compared to every cartridge. That isn't the point.

What specifically is wrong with it? So far, everyone has said "recoil". Is that it?

After listening to what people have said, it seems like it is a cartridge that does have a definite niche in some shooters' lives that another cartidge can't fill.
 
I really like my Styer m40. Recoil hmmm, I'm not an expert shooter. I am an anticipater big time and find this the most comfortable to shoot. I am also the most consitant with this. This just MY opinion.

Compared to: H&K compact 45
Ruger P9? 45
S&W 457 45
H&K compact 9
several other 9's that I tried
 
I really like my Styer m40. Recoil hmmm, I'm not an expert shooter. I am an anticipater big time and find this the most comfortable to shoot. I am also the most consistant with this. This just MY opinion.

Compared to: H&K compact 45
Ruger P9? 45
S&W 457 45
Colt Officer 45
H&K compact 9
Berretta 9 unclear on model
several other 9's that I tried
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Why was the 40s&w invented?
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
9K
420Stainless
4
A
  • Locked
How does the .357Sig compare to the .40S&W?
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
EBRDude
E
D
  • Locked
Does .40S&W seem really loud to anyone else?
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
Mike86
M
Styx
  • Locked
Any 40s&w Fans?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
161
Views
9K
huntsman
huntsman
G
  • Locked
Which .40S&W ?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
gudel
G
Back
Top