What's wrong with .40S&W?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whats wrong with the 40 S&W

Ka boom prone, loaded to the edge of safety, recoil with full power loads not as good as the 9mm or 45 ACP. Sold my 40's and replaced them with a Glock 37 in 45 GAP. Waiting for the G 38. Inheritly more accurate than the 40 S&W, has the 45 "thump" and fits into a 9 mm size frame. Check out 45GAP.com It is a better round than the 40 IMHO
 
There's nothing wrong with the .40 S&W. People are just defending their personal preference.

I shoot a Beretta 96 and have yet to witness this dreaded, awful recoil. Felt recoil IS more than a 9mm. So what? Bring a .44 magnum to the range, touch off a few of those first. Your autos will all feel like pussy cats.
:D

The only .40s I have shot are my Beretta, and an XD. Both are decent pistols for that caliber and handle it well.

Go out and rent/shoot one. Then decide if it's for you.


--meathammer
 
So well, in fact, that with 10mm and .40 around, I see about zero "need" for .45 at all, and very little for 9mm.

On the other hand, many people see zero "need" for the .40 with the .45 and 9mm around.
 
And thats just fine.

As for myself, I'll carry the .40, since it does everything as well or better than the .45 for carry purposes; I'll use the 9 for plinking since its a great caliber in many great platforms, and I'll use the 10mm because its the most badass autoloading round out there.:D

I've got nothing against .45, but to me, its simply a cartridge of marginal overall utility, since, to ME, its not really the best at anything. I see 9 as the best "small" cartridge, .40 as the best medium cartridge, and 10mm as the best big cartridge.

But of course there will always be a huge market for .45, and it isn't going anywhere. And choice is good. In fact I think a P220ST may be my next handgun when I get around to it.
 
TTBadBoy,

not to be argumentative but the .40S&W was indeed designed to compete with and replace the 10mm for the FBI. the 10mm turned out to be too much of a handful for some of its agents and they wanted a 180 grain bullet to go 950 FPS in a smaller package and Smith and Wesson said, "ok, we can do that" and viola! the .40S&W was born.

by the way, its my favorite round too. the recoils is a little "snappier" than either 9mm or .45, but its just takes a little getting used to. good shooting....

Bobby
 

Ka boom prone, loaded to the edge of safety

I've read in just about every Glock KB thread involving the .40S&W about how the brass is always bulged and some blame Glock, some blame the cartridge and some blame both. A couple months back a friend and I were at the range and there was a guy in the next stall firing a .40 while we were shooting our 10's. I was picking up brass as we went and separating his from ours ( :cuss: ) when I noticed that every single one of his brass was bulged. This actually helped sort brass as you could tell his without even looking at the headstamp after I noticed the bulging.

The gun? Don't know what the designation is, but it was a Smith autoloader for sure but with the 4.25 barrel instead of the 5 inch. So apparently it isn't just Glocks kicking out bulged .40 brass.
 
My 11 yr old put 30 rds through the H&K p2000 .40 the other day..

He looked back at me and says, dad do we have anymore ammo for me to shoot?
I told him we were out but would buy some more for another day.

Maybe its just the gun I have in .40 but like I said previously, the .40 and the 9mm seem to have the same recoil only the .40 having a slower recoil more like the .45.....

The only gun my boy said he wouldnt shoot again and I wont either is a very small .380 that I have...brutal recoil!!!!!!drf
 
Recoil schmecoil! Go shoot magnum revolvers and become proficient, then we'll talk recoil. Also, all felt recoil is not soley the cartridge. I can shoot the same load in different guns and experience different felt recoil. If recoil is an issue, the .22lr would be a good round to consider. :) :scrutiny:
 
It seems to me that if you can dislike .40 because it doesn't make 10mm power levels, then you have to dislike 9 and 45 for the same reason... since none of them come close to 10mm.

As far as bulged brass, my P226 .40 doesn't show the slightest bit of bulge in any brass and I've specifically checked plenty of brass from the hottest loads I've ever fired through the gun. Just got to get a gun that was really designed to handle the cartridge.
 
Neither my SIG 239 or my glock 27 bulge brass. I also use Blazer aluminum cased rounds and have never had a problem with them either.

Personally, I believe that if your gun excessively bulges brass in the 6 o'clock position you have a defective barrel or someone took off too much metal when polishing the feed ramp (probably the number one cause of ruined colt 45 auto barrels in the 70s).

The 40 is as safe as any other factory round. Some folks must be afraid of their own shadows judging by how serious they take every little incident they read on the internet. I wonder what they'll do when they read about the guy who was killed when the picture tube in his computer monitor blew up for no apparent reason. I guess they won't be back to post any more scaredy cat responses until they can get a flat screen monitor:rolleyes:
 
Recoil schmecoil! Go shoot magnum revolvers and become proficient, then we'll talk recoil. Also, all felt recoil is not soley the cartridge. I can shoot the same load in different guns and experience different felt recoil. If recoil is an issue, the .22lr would be a good round to consider.

Respectfully, this statement is incorrect.

It's equivalent to me saying that you're a wimp if those boots that I like give you blisters.

Recoil is incredibly subjective. I've seen THR members who shoot .454 regularly post that they find 9x18 Mak's unpleasant to shoot. I wouldn't be calling anybody who comfortably fires heavy iron a wimp because they find a little Mak' unpleasant. I respect their honesty in describing a phenomenon that is consistent among HG shooters...the consistency is that reaction to recoil will be variable. That's how it is.

No two shooters are identical. Their reaction to recoil from any given platform will be different. Their reaction is subjective based not only on actual felt physical recoil but as several have pointed out, the perception that the sound of the blast implants in their brain.

This was clearly evident while watching shooters react to the requirement to shoot an unfamiliar piece in low light at a recent IDPA match. Very light frangible loads were used in a revolver (I can't recall if it was .357 or 38sp). The sound indoors was deafening. I was shooting my G35 for the remaining stages and found the wheelie to be delightful to shoot (now I must get one). I saw other shooters shaking their hands in discomfort.

Does that give me the right to claim some Testosterone induced superiority? No. It means that for whatever reason, my physical make-up and emotional reaction (with physical manifestations) did not result in the same response as some of my fellow competitors.

Recoil reaction isn't something you can predict from a chart on a ballistic table. Whether it's actual felt recoil or perception from the blast, to the shooter with the blaster in his/her hand, that perception is 100% reality. Can recoil be managed? Absolutely. Can it be overcome? I think for many shooters it can.

But claims of the type above aren't useful to the healthy enjoyment of HG's because no one can impose their recoil reaction experience on others.

Safe shooting,

CZ52'
 
Last edited:
Nothing's wrong with .40 S&W.

It is what it is, a compromise round. And it is real good in that role.

If emotion is taken out of the equation, and "just the facts" are examined, the .40 speaks (quite loudly) for itself.

If you're into light/fast/energy, the 135's have it covered. Slow/heavy? Try 180 gr. JHP at 950-980 fps. Unless you handload, the .40 seems to be the most diverse "service" caliber going.
 
I like the .40 S&W. I have a Firestar M40 and a Kahr K40. The recoil on the Firestar is quite violent but the recoil on the Kahr is merely snappy. I like shooting both guns but especially the Kahr. Any future pistol I buy is most likely to be another forty, probably a large double stack.:)
 
[The .40] is the DIRECT result of a 10mm. So it was designed to compete with 10mm because the 10mm competes with 9mm and .45.

And thats exactly why the popularity with the 10mm is not greater... because S&W wants their own cartridge with the little "S&W" signature to sell, not the 10mm.

The 10mm is a little battle going on with end-users -VS- manufacturers. End-users realize the awesome characteristics of the 10mm and therefore are clamoring after it. Whereas Smith & Wesson realizes the marketing potential of their stupid little "S&W" behind all the ".40" caliber designation.

It must have been some wimpy FBI agents with little hands who couldn't handle the 10mm. I'm not a robust guy and I can handle it just fine.

Having said all that I guess there is some value to having a 10mm sized round (called the .40s&w) in a 9mm size, which mean more concealable.
 
I have tried to like 40 SW. On paper it makes a lot of sense. In reality,
I reached my own conclusion.

The 40 SW has its greatest strength when used for self defense in a carry gun. This will not be a universal opinion.

Further, I have found the cartridge to be difficult to reload as some guns will digest factory without problems. It often gags on 40 reloads. I know it doesn't make sense unless you have experienced this. A gun that I can not make reloads for has no place in my safe.

These are all opinions. Those who differ have already expressed theirs.

Those who have not bring it on!!
 
i love the 40sw i've heard it's superior to 45ACP in more ways than one, although im sure many folks would argue that.
 
With good case support and handloads, the 40 has more power potential than the 10mm.

The large primer pocket and deep extractor groove makes for thin brass around the primer. That is the 10mm's weak point.
 
GEEZ Clark!

You might want to give folks some background on exactly what you mean and how you arrived at your conclusions.

You're going to have people building handgrenades with their Dillon presses...
 
Dear Jed:

I agree with you on the .40 being at its best in a duty or concealed carry factory gun. In the past, I had two 1911 hi-cap pistols in .40 S&W for IPSC and target shooting exclusively - an expensive Briley "Limited Master" on a STI frame and, later, a full-sized Para-Ordnance double-stack gun special-built for me. I fought for three to four years to get the .40 S&W functioning properly in both of these guns. I tried different cartridge overall lengths, various bullet designs (incl. round nose), but I was never able to cure the many malfunctions. An unreliable IPSC pistol is virtually useless. Finally, I had enough. I gave away both pistols at a considerable loss and started using 9 mm x 19 Parabellum and .45 ACP in semi-auto pistols exclusively. Nowadays, my IPSC "Standard Division" gun is a single-stack Premier II .45 ACP; for IPSC "Production Division" I use a Glock 17 w/NY trigger. Both work without a single problem.

Initially, I thought the .40 S&W to be a great idea, but I have grown to really dislike this cartridge. I won't acquire another .40 again. However, I'd be interested in the 10 mm Auto, but I haven't exacly figured out yet what to do with it, as I am quite satisfied with the performance of the 9 mm and especially the .45 ACP.

Thanks for allowing me to share my experience.
 
Its not surprising that the 40S&W is so popular when you read the history of the 41 magnum. The 40 in its 180 gn @ 1000fps load is very close to what was originally asked for in the 41 mag (40 caliber 200gr @ 1000 fps).

Instead what was delivered in the first 41 mag police load was 210 @1200 fps which is very siminmlar to the original 180gn 10mm load. Both proved too much for most cops and the extra weight of the 41 mags N frame didn't make any more popular.

The 10mm is a great round just like the 41 mag (but they are not a great police load). I real life though the 40 drops them dead right there just like its suposed to and is easier for many to carry and shoot.
 
Quote: With good case support and handloads, the 40 has more power potential than the 10mm.

I'm sorry; that is physically impossible. The .40 and the 10mm have the exact same case diameter with the 10mm case being longer. That translates into more powder for the same bullet.

http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/cutenews/show_products.php

10mm

Bullet : 200gr XTP/JHP
Ballistics : 1250fps/ 694ft./ lbs. - Glock 20

Bullet : 165gr Golden Saber Hollow Point
Ballistics : 1425fps/ 744ft./lbs. - Glock 20

Bullet : 180gr Golden Saber Hollow Point
Ballistics :1330fps/ 707 ft./ lbs. - Glock 20

Bullet : Gold Dot Lineup
Ballistics : 155gr. @ 1475fps / 750ft/lbs- Glock 20
165gr. @ 1400fps/ 718ft/lbs- Glock 20
180gr. @ 1300fps/ 676ft/lbs- Glock 20

Bullet : 135gr. Nosler Jacketed Hollow Point.
Ballistics : 1600fps/ 767 ft./lbs. - Glock 20

All DoubleTap loads are at or under SAAMI specs.
 
I fought for three to four years to get the .40 S&W functioning properly in both of these guns. I tried different cartridge overall lengths, various bullet designs (incl. round nose), but I was never able to cure the many malfunctions...

How could this possibly be attributed to the cartridge itself? This definitely sounds like a gun issue to me.

With good case support and handloads, the 40 has more power potential than the 10mm.

The large primer pocket and deep extractor groove makes for thin brass around the primer. That is the 10mm's weak point.

Most people agree that the 10mm brass is stronger than .40s&w brass. Not only that, but with the greater case volume, it is a physical impossibility that .40 could carry more power than 10mm. I guess all I can say is, lets see some ballistic numbers? A .40 has to go over pressure to throw a 155gr at 1300 fps, while a 10mm will throw it at 1500 without going over pressure.
 
bad boy you raise a point as to how could it be the cartridge and not the gun.

I sent the gun a Ruger back to its maker and they supposedly made repairs. Well the repairs did not apparently take.

The issue in my case was not with factory ammo as it performed flawlessly in the gun. Of course, Ruger says not to use reloads in its manual I believe.

The issue had to do with ease of reloading the cartridge and making it function in a situation where a lot of shooting would take place such as competitions. Competitors just can't live with unforgiving combinations of guns plus reloads. Also competitors stick to the guns knowing that somehow they will beat this thing. Finally exasperation takes over, a bad taste is left in the mouth and out of it for what you can get out of the gun is unbelievably attractive.

Most of the posters here have shared very well their experiences and sour as I am on the cartridge I can still see its benefits even if I was not able to obtain them!!!

In forums such as these it cost us posters a lot of dollars to provide you free of charge our experiences. I have nothing to gain or lose from sales of ammo or firearms!! Also known as no dog in the fight!!
 
jed, I value all posts to this forum that outlines people's honest hard learned real life experiences, good or bad, with all sorts of equipment. The single best thing about forums like this is the mass of knowledge and experience that can be pooled into one place. In fact almost every firearm purchase I make is based on what I feel would work for me, crossed against dozens of real world "performance reviews" posted to forums like this by real world end users. I do like the .40, but that doesn't devalue your posted experience to me or other .40 fans, and I apologize if it sounded like it did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top