Garandimal
member
... to chamber the G48 in .40 S&W.
GR
Maybe THIS Will Spur GLOCK...
- Thread starter Garandimal
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
Why? (and who would care?)
Well...
1. It would be an Apex CC/EDC pistol, eclipsing even the beloved slimline G36 .45 ACP.
2. Discerning shooters that desire a 400 ft-lb CC/EDC pistol cartridge, and do not require remedial training to shoot it proficiently.
GR
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,055
Glock is following the early 20th Century Colt and S&W model: all manufacturing decisions are driven exclusively by police and military sales.
If any large federal, state, or municipal agency places a large order, then Glock will make enough for that order and some civilian sales. Fact is, the civilian market just isn’t big enough to drive investing in tooling up for a long run.
1942bull
Member
I think the Ruger Max 9 is more like to spur Glock, M&P, Springfield, etc to rethink things.
How exactly? Besides Glock, they all have high capacity micro 9s and with the Glock you can buy 15 round flush mags.
Last edited:
1942bull
Member
The Max 9 competes with the Sig P365, Hellcat, Glock 26, and Shield Plus.
It comes with 1 ten and 1 twelve round magazines.
It has a tritium fiber optic day/night front sight
It comes optic ready for direct mounting of co-witnessed JPoint™ and Shield-pattern micro red dot sights. Size, weight, capacities of the close competition listed below are comparable.
Below are comparative street prices for the Max 9 and its competitors. Features vs. price the Max 9 wins.
Max 9: $449
Shield Plus: $542
Sig 365: $699
Hellcat: $549
Glock26: $599
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
I think the market is large enough, but they are facing tough price-point competition from Brazilan, Turkish, and Balkan manufacturers for civilian sales, whereas those makers are not usually even considered by US and W. European Govt. agencies.
The competition doen't have any problems selling their products where they're at. If price is the only thing a buyer is considering, they'll probably buy the Ruger or a Taurus G3c. If quality and ease of disassembly are important, they'll look elsewhere.
As for a .40 cal single stack Glock, it'd be a limited market. We've had the long slide Shield .40s and they're slow sellers.
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
What would be the actual cost impact of the .40... when the 9mm version already exists?
Barrel/RSA spring/Feed lip/Roll stamp.
GR
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,055
I really don’t think there’s much of a market for a new .40S&W civilian pistol. I’m not saying there’s no market, just that it’s not large enough to justify tooling up for a large enough run to sell at a competitive price-point. New model buyers tend to fall into a couple of categories: features buyers who compare checklists of jargon, and list price buyers who compare price points and extras. Those two categories combined are better than half the market. Don’t get their interest and what’s left isn’t enough for a reasonable profit. That’s just simple economics.
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
For a hi-cap micro... it looks sweet.
Ammo weight adds up though, so that is good in a 9mm.
Me?
For EDC, low-cap w/ a mag change works.
G36 or P938.
Carry the extra ammo, and weight, in the spare mag I'm carrying anyway.
GR
Last edited:
Zerodefect
member
That's lame.
My G23 has 10,000+ Rounds down the pipe and looks like new. That's $2600 in ammo. And I see no reason why it won't go another 10,000 rounds.
40 is ballistically superior to 9mm. I carry it because I want as much power, and as big of a hole as practical. I'd buy a 40 version of a G48 immediately.
My G23 has 10,000+ Rounds down the pipe and looks like new. That's $2600 in ammo. And I see no reason why it won't go another 10,000 rounds.
40 is ballistically superior to 9mm. I carry it because I want as much power, and as big of a hole as practical. I'd buy a 40 version of a G48 immediately.
JR24
Member
It's really simple economics. We are talking about a small subset of gun buyers (.40 S&W) inside another subset (single stack carry guns) in a caliber that LEO is largely moving away from, and therefore unlikely to adopt for BUG or off duty in any numbers worth noting.
To achieve this you'd need to modify a gun designed from the ground up (presumably) to tolerate 9mm pressures and recoil. We already see the Gen 5 23 needed a thicker slide to handle the 40, so they'd need to determine if that is needed, engineer a new slide if needed and do extensive reliability and durability testing.
All to target a small subset of potential buyers, when they are selling 9mm guns as fast as they can make them, apparently.
Not a good ROI at this point, IMO. Apparently in Glocks opinion as well. As much as folks like to rag on them, their business and marketing model has kept them in great shape for quite some time, so it's tough to second guess them with no idea of the market research and data they have.
We always had issues with "feature creep" and "project creep" in multiple jobs I had in the past, the end user never understanding just what went into even small changes and additions and how often those changes didn't turn out nearly as useful as the end user had thought it would.
Maybe when the gun buying frenzy settles and Glock needs to splash the market in the lull they'll roll something like this out. Personally I'd prefer to see the Gen 5 .45/10mm lineup instead, but that's even more work for a smaller target audience.
To achieve this you'd need to modify a gun designed from the ground up (presumably) to tolerate 9mm pressures and recoil. We already see the Gen 5 23 needed a thicker slide to handle the 40, so they'd need to determine if that is needed, engineer a new slide if needed and do extensive reliability and durability testing.
All to target a small subset of potential buyers, when they are selling 9mm guns as fast as they can make them, apparently.
Not a good ROI at this point, IMO. Apparently in Glocks opinion as well. As much as folks like to rag on them, their business and marketing model has kept them in great shape for quite some time, so it's tough to second guess them with no idea of the market research and data they have.
We always had issues with "feature creep" and "project creep" in multiple jobs I had in the past, the end user never understanding just what went into even small changes and additions and how often those changes didn't turn out nearly as useful as the end user had thought it would.
Maybe when the gun buying frenzy settles and Glock needs to splash the market in the lull they'll roll something like this out. Personally I'd prefer to see the Gen 5 .45/10mm lineup instead, but that's even more work for a smaller target audience.
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
40 has terrible internal ballistics, and terminal ballistics are on par with 9mm. Of you want guns to disassemble themselves, 40 is a great choice!
How adults view you...
GR
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
This is the current fad, driven by the FBI limp-wrists and bean-counters.
An 8/10-round, 4" Bbl'ed, slimline .40 would be ideal for civilian use.
An Apex SD pistol.
GR
JR24
Member
That is your opinion, I don't happen to agree. I've yet to see any evidence that for civilian CCW the slight, very slight in some loadings, increase the .40 offers in actual terminal performance significant enough to justify the recoil, abuse to firearm, and lower capacity.
But getting into yet another caliber war here does seem boring, so we can just agree to disagree
Edit: but you are correct, this "fad" could change again and increase the .40 demand, then the ROI on such a development would make it a lot more enticing.
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,055
The irony here is the people saying the death of .40S&W is largely due to the FBI's change from the .40S&W to 9mm are right - but it was the FBI's move to 10mm following "The Miami Shootout" which gave "birth" to the .40S&W when 10mm turned out to be "too much gun" for some agents, in terms of recoil and carry weight. The FBI gave us the .40 and the FBI is taking it away.
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,055
And when the next "Miami Shootout" occurs and a group of agents are lost because they were "inadequately armed" with WunderNines instead of "real guns" then the FBI will go to the firearms industry demanding a new and improved law enforcement weapon their agents can carry easily all day, shoot through solid walls without over-penetrating and inadvertently injuring innocent bystanders, etc. etc. and the next Unicorn cartridge will be invented and every LEA will adopt it and excess inventory will find its way into the public - and all will be right with the world again. The FBI's leadership - from Hoover to the current crop - seems expert in blaming the equipment.
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
That is your opinion, I don't happen to agree. I've yet to see any evidence that for civilian CCW the slight, very slight in some loadings, increase the .40 offers in actual terminal performance significant enough to justify the recoil, abuse to firearm, and lower capacity.
But getting into yet another caliber war here does seem boring, so we can just agree to disagree
Edit: but you are correct, this "fad" could change again and increase the .40 demand, then the ROI on such a development would make it a lot more enticing.
It's a better round, with a little extra recoil because of it - just bother to look at the Twenty-Five Years of field data. (that is buried buy the afore mentioned 9mm sycophants)
If one can't shoot the .40 well enough?
They are either physically deficient, or in need of remedial training.
P.S. lose the stopwatch - it is a mental disorder.
GR
JR24
Member
As I said, I'm not terribly interested in jumping back into the caliber wars, especially if your argument has already devolved into insults to anyone who doesn't agree with your theory, and is based, even in part, on 25 year old data that certainly does not take into account that modern, current, carry ammo is all designed to perform remarkably the same in terms of penetration and expansion.
Again, I'll agree to disagree, and continue with the original answer that Glock will make a slime 40 if/when market forces indicate it will give a good return on investment, which I don't think will be any time soon, but I don't possess Glocks market research.
And I'm out of this thread, enjoy.
Again, I'll agree to disagree, and continue with the original answer that Glock will make a slime 40 if/when market forces indicate it will give a good return on investment, which I don't think will be any time soon, but I don't possess Glocks market research.
And I'm out of this thread, enjoy.
GeoDudeFlorida
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 11,055
Here's an interesting take on the selection and use of the .40S&W by the FBI. Written by one of the participants in the 1986 Miami Shootout and observer of the testing which led to the creation of the .40, Edmundo Mireles, author of "FBI Miami Firefight: Five Minutes that Changed the Bureau."
https://gundigest.com/tactical/1986-miami-shootout-the-aftermath
To me, the question has nothing to do with "caliber wars" - that's kind of a childish argument to get into and I stay away from childish arguments - but it is all about marketing, doctrine and training. Nothing much of real significance has changed about the 9mm bullet in the last thirty years. Small caliber hollow points are still unreliable, sheetrock and windshields still defeat small caliber projectiles, velocity is still secondary to mass in the force equation (F=ma; always, everywhere in the known Universe) and bigger bullets still cause bigger wound channels and bigger holes in things. The .45ACP is still the most effective man-stopping, manageable, and commonly-available pistol cartridge ever issued; but, it is a big, slow-moving bullet which is not affective at punching holes in engine blocks - and for some odd reason, the FBI is fascinated with the idea of stopping cars with handguns by shooting through steel doors and engine blocks. Also, any concealable .45 is going to carry fewer than seven rounds, an insufficient number for a field operative, and a lot of small-framed agents cannot shoot a .45ACP accurately - their hands are too small for the grip. The .40 was chosen because it came closet to the .45's performance in a small, manageable package. And it could punch through a windshield without deflecting or losing significant mass.
OP
OP
Garandimal
member
Absolutely correct.
.45 ACP performance, in a 9mm form factor, w/ acceptable capacity.
Apex.
GR
- Status
Similar threads
