What happened to 40 caliber?

Manageable varies from person to person. I’m fairly large (and unfortunately still overweight but I’m working on it) and have no trouble at all with either my M 1 or my SMLE. However with handguns it depends on the arthritic condition of my hands on some days my 40 is perfectly easy and manageable, however on other days I can only manage a 9, and on real bad days I might carry my SR22. Shot placement is the key that is most affected by management issues in my case.80+ year old eyes 20/25 vision much arthritis.
I still like the 40 and have a decent stockpile. It’s not going anywhere the 9 is not a magic round, although it is venerated by some as being the best thing since flush toilets.

ps I believe the original question dealt with why is the 40 not as common as it once was. Thread got way off topic I feel

Kleanbore said:

That has to do with how rapidly the shooter can score hits on a specific target area. With heavier guns... It isn't just a matter of caliber.

Click to expand...

Again how much is manageable for a human?
You don't know their age, size, condition or skill level.
If it's measurable as you say how much is manageable?

OK then. Thanks for bringng things back around Bruce as I forgot what was being talked about originally. Its not as common because this big notion of standardizing on less cartridges became a thing. It was just too complicated for some to have to "stockpile" so many different cartridges. People also fell for this notion that you needed to have 5 million rounds per caliber on hand in the case of an "end of the world" scenario. Yet here we are still.

Heres the thing though. For those who are true Firearms enthusiests Stanardization is pretty boring after a while. I still like shooting a wide range of designs and calibers. 25acp, 32acp, 7.62x25, 357 magnum etc. etc.. Same for different designs. Be pretty boring if I just shot plastic 9mm striker fired Glock types the rest of my life. All these caliber wars and brand arguements are pretty silly and just seem to cause more division among our firearms culture than anything else.

The FBI switch had an impact sure. However... I am not obsessed with copying everything the FBI does. After being involved with firearms for decades I would hope to be at least at little capable of making my own decisions.

So.... I will continue to shoot and carry these "dead" calibers like 40S&W and 357Sig...Thank you very much!

JohnKSa said:

Neither of which would exist if people hadn't copied everything the FBI does...

Click to expand...

Thats funny. Very true in a way. If Law Enforcement never copied the FBI/Secret Service etc. I guess the cartridges never would have become common enough to have taken off like they did. The development of these cartridges would have never happened. In a sick way the Miami shootout had a silver lining.

TomJ said:

I'm not qualified to have an opinion on that, so in the interest of not embarrassing myself by commenting on something I know nothing about I'll let other, more knowledgable people continue to have that discussion.

Click to expand...

Yours is NOT the Way of the Internet! One can opine about literally anything with aplomb, claim all manner of bona fides, and will fit in with the teeming virtual masses.

JohnKSa said:

If the FBI hadn't adopted the reduced 10mm loading, the .40S&W wouldn't have been designed by S&W to emulate that loading. The .357SIG was developed from the .40S&W.

Sot it's not just they wouldn't have taken off--they would never have even existed...

One could argue that some other round would have come along that was more or less the same thing. And maybe that round would have taken off and filled the .40S&W niche.

But there was already a round like that--the .41AE. It was made to work in 9mm sized pistols with just a barrel/recoil spring/magazine swap and provide higher performance. Bullet diameter was 0.41", bullet weights ranged from 170 to 210gr. The 185gr was about 1180gr. Sound familiar? It was even a bit hotter than the .40S&W.

But it never caught on in spite of the fact that the gunwriters loved it.

Click to expand...

Yes I remember the 41AE. Great cartridge. I shot it in a Jericho 941 dual caliber kit (which could handle it pretty well). Didnt really catch on right off the start because we were still in the Wondernine phase and the 94 AWB hadnt hit yet. Still some conversion kits floating around but the ammo is pretty hard to come by. You can still get brass here...

https://www.rccbrass.com/product/41-action-express/

Ammo....

https://shop.reedsammo.com/41-Action-Express-41AE_c73.htm

As a moderator of another forum, I think the moderation staff have been quite patient with some of the rude and inflammatory comments here.

Guys, it is possible to present your opinion that is counter to someone else’s without being rude.

“Rudeness is the weak man’s imitation of strength.”

JohnKSa said:

One could argue that some other round would have come along that was more or less the same thing. And maybe that round would have taken off and filled the .40S&W niche.

Click to expand...

One could argue that the gun industry keeps leading the gun community the long way around the barn to show you a new fangled uber special gun that puts the same ballistics in a package that not only includes the gun but new magazines and ammo and more doo dads to get you to spend money.
The 38-40 AKA 38WCF was launching 180gr bullets at 1000 fps 115 years before HWFE they're even .400 diameter.
One of my favorites is the 357 Sig that was developed to put 357 Mag ballistics in a semi auto when one of the selling points for 357 Mag to LEO was it put the 38 Super Auto's ballistics in their revolvers.
I mean what kind of dinosaur would think just stuffing some 124 gr gold dots in a 38 Super lightweight commander could work in today's world?

I wonder what would be the consensus on the cartridge had the .40 S&W preceded the 10MM. Would the 10MM be known as the “.40 Mag? .40 Special? .40 Spicy?

It’s another day, and I still like the .40S&W!
YMMV

Buzznrose said:

I wonder what would be the consensus on the cartridge had the .40 S&W preceded the 10MM. Would the 10MM be known as the “.40 Mag? .40 Special? .40 Spicy?

It’s another day, and I still like the .40S&W!
YMMV

Click to expand...

Along that train of thought, someone should take the wonder 9 to the next level with a slightly smaller bullet so magazines will have more capacity. Then crank up the pressure with the latest bullet technology and we can all say it’s just as good as ALL the other service cartridges! Brilliant!

(30Super carry in case someone didn’t catch what I’m sarcastically getting at)

Rumors of 40S&W being dead seem to be highly exagerated as every time I see a thread like this it gets a lot of traffic.

I will say this. I would like to see some more 40S&W light offereings for range use. Soft shooting that reduces wear etc. Simliar to shooting standard preasure 9mm and then useing +p for carry. This below is actually a very nice load in a smaller or lighter pistol with a lower mass slide....

https://atlantaarms.com/products/elite-40-s-w-180gr-jfp-minor.html

I tried some of those minor power loads in Sigma and smaller size polymer 40s and they were great. No functional issues whatsoever. I think that if Federal put out something like this as a new offering (40S&W lite) it would do well. I recommend people who shoot 9mm micro pistols try the Hornady 9mm lite and Atlanta 100gr steel challenge loads. They can really help people with all that snap they struggle so much with. Same thing can apply to 40S&W

https://atlantaarms.com/products/elite-9mm-100gr-fmj-steel-challenge.html

The .40 S&W is actually as good a round for the purpose - self defense - as it ever was.
However, it is not the whiz-bang cartridge of the 10 mm cartridge; does not go as fast. So, the .40 S&W lost some interest as it was not a smaller version with the same velocity. For those concerned with actual self-defense in the real world, it works quite well.
One notes even in pre panic times, 9x19mm was less expensive per round. This has not changed with the current Administration's inflation policies.
The 9x19mm is generally possessed of less recoil. (Pistol weights being more or less the same; comparing a light pistol to a heavier one is fraudulent and deceptive.) The 9x19mm typically holds more rounds, which is important if one misses a lot.
The reason for the .40 S&W to lose popularity is public opinion. Which is easily controlled by advertisers.

Archie said:

The .40 S&W is actually as good a round for the purpose - self defense - as it ever was.
However, it is not the whiz-bang cartridge of the 10 mm cartridge; does not go as fast. So, the .40 S&W lost some interest as it was not a smaller version with the same velocity. For those concerned with actual self-defense in the real world, it works quite well.
One notes even in pre panic times, 9x19mm was less expensive per round. This has not changed with the current Administration's inflation policies.
The 9x19mm is generally possessed of less recoil. (Pistol weights being more or less the same; comparing a light pistol to a heavier one is fraudulent and deceptive.) The 9x19mm typically holds more rounds, which is important if one misses a lot.
The reason for the .40 S&W to lose popularity is public opinion. Which is easily controlled by advertisers.

Click to expand...

It's a monkey see monkey do thing for most. Monkeys follow and regurgitate what law enforcement, military, and influencers in the firearm industry say and do.

If law enforcement or the military ditched 9mm today and switch to 40s&w, just about everyone will run out and start buying 40 again.

I don't find 40 to be snappy at all, and it's funny how 45acp and 10mm are generally accepted, but the lack of capacity always get thrown around whenever 40 is brought up. In a single stack pistol, you are only less one round vs 9mm. In a double stack, you are typically only losing 2 rounds. With the G26 vs G27, they both hold 10 rounds.

Whether 40s&w is snappy or not depends on the model gun, the size and weight of the gun, and the choice of ammo. Just like the Hellcat might be a little more snappy vs a P365 even though they are both 9mm. A micro 9mm will kick more than a compact or full size. Some 9mm ammo will have more recoil than other 9mm ammo. Revolver guys know lighter 125 gr ammo will generally be hotter than 158 gr out of the same gun which will directly corrolate whether felt recoil is too much for the shooter or not. Likewise, many 40s&w guns and ammo combos will be softer shooting than some 9mms. Everyone speaks like it's a one size fits all experience ONLY when it comes to 40s&w.

I find it amusing whenever I see sheeple dissuade other gun owners from buying a steel frame or full size 40s&w because it will be "too snappy" and "follow up shots will suffer," but these same people will be in another thread promoting tiny grip 19oz-ish micro 9mms. They will regurgitate the canned response to others off the rip telling them not buy a gun in 40s&w because it will be to snappy when they have ZERO experience shooting 40s&w out of said pistol to even know whether it is or isn't. They would NEVER tell people not to buy a 9mm handgun they never fired because the recoil will be too much....

Basically people regurgitate what they been told to think instead of thinking for themselves, and they don't even realize it.

The whole recoil thing is real and yet recoil is something your body grows accustom too. USPSA competition is a great place to watch how lower recoil speeds things up. In my experience a new shooter and one that is not or has not developed much recoil tolerance the splits time difference between 9mm (Minor) and 40S&W/45 ACP (Major) is noticeable. As the shooter become more tolerant the splits in general get faster and faster and the difference between Major and Minor gets smaller and smaller and with most experience shooters (say B class and above) it is only slightly faster and you need a good timer to even see the difference in splits. It is typically on the order of a just a couple hundredths of a second faster.

Going to ramble...

It was with a revolver not a semi auto but I spent a summer shooting USPSA club matches with both a Major revolver (S&W 625 6-shot, 45 ACP pushing a 230 gr bullet @~750 fps a 172 power factor) and Minor revolver (S&W 627, 8-shot, 38 Short Colt pushing a 160 gr bullet @~850 fps, a 136 power factor). This was just before the rule change and I wanted to see which was going to be more competitive, I shot the Minor Revolver in Production Division (got B-class in Production with a revolver ).

On average at close ranges my splits with the Minor revolver were only ~.03 seconds faster, at longer ranges or smaller targets no real difference to speak of. The 33% greater capacity of the Minor revolver just barely beat out the Minor scoring penalty. And after several matches encompassing 27 stages and ~524 rds fired, the total elapsed time for the Major Revolver was 592.92 second and the Minor Revolver was 564.31 seconds. A difference of 28.81 seconds or the Minor revolver was ~ 4.8% faster. But with the data I have recorded there is no way to know what percentage of that faster over all time is faster splits and what percentage is reduced number of reloads. Over 524 rd that is least 60 reloads on the clock with the Major gun and at least 39 reloads on the clock with the Minor Revolver. For those curious after 27 stages the Minor Revolver won 2421.1 match points vs Major 2419.6 match points A difference of ~.06%.

mcb said:

The whole recoil thing is real and yet recoil is something your body grows accustom too. USPSA competition is a great place to watch how lower recoil speeds things up. In my experience a new shooter and one that is not or has not developed much recoil tolerance the splits time difference between 9mm (Minor) and 40S&W/45 ACP (Major) is noticeable. As the shooter become more tolerant the splits in general get faster and faster and the difference between Major and Minor gets smaller and smaller and with most experience shooters (say B class and above) it is only slightly faster and you need a good timer to even see the difference in splits. It is typically on the order of a just a couple hundredths of a second faster.

Going to ramble...

It was with a revolver not a semi auto but I spent a summer shooting USPSA club matches with both a Major revolver (S&W 625 6-shot, 45 ACP pushing a 230 gr bullet @~750 fps a 172 power factor) and Minor revolver (S&W 627, 8-shot, 38 Short Colt pushing a 160 gr bullet @~850 fps, a 136 power factor). This was just before the rule change and I wanted to see which was going to be more competitive, I shot the Minor Revolver in Production Division (got B-class in Production with a revolver ).

On average at close ranges my splits with the Minor revolver were only ~.03 seconds faster, at longer ranges or smaller targets no real difference to speak of. The 33% greater capacity of the Minor revolver just barely beat out the Minor scoring penalty. And after several matches encompassing 27 stages and ~524 rds fired, the total elapsed time for the Major Revolver was 592.92 second and the Minor Revolver was 564.31 seconds. A difference of 28.81 seconds or the Minor revolver was ~ 4.8% faster. But with the data I have recorded there is no way to know what percentage of that faster over all time is faster splits and what percentage is reduced number of reloads. Over 524 rd that is least 60 reloads on the clock with the Major gun and at least 39 reloads on the clock with the Minor Revolver. For those curious after 27 stages the Minor Revolver won 2421.1 match points vs Major 2419.6 match points A difference of ~.06%.

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting real world experience. I don't believe many "40s&w is dying" guys realize that it's a relatively popular caliber in USPSA.

Regarding split times and recoil of various cartridges, I did some testing on this for myself back in March of 2020. I decided to look back at my notes, which although not terribly detailed or scientific, do give me some basis on my performance with various power levels. Here's what I found:

Shooting was done on 3 separate days, to avoid shooter fatigue. All shooting was done at 7 yards onto and 8" target. 50 rounds were used for each cartridge. Shooting 5 shots per string, for a total of 10 strings.

Ruger SR22 shooting some kind of .22lr:
Splits: around 0.20-0.27s (started and ended about the same)
Accuracy: 48/50 shots on target

G22/9mm conversion shooting 115gr @1125fps:
Splits: Started slower (didn't record what), but got down to around 0.30s
Accuracy: 42/50 shots on target

G22/.357sig conversion shooting 124gr @ 1425fps:
Splits: Started at 0.40-0.50s, got down to around 0.35s
Accuracy: 40/50 shots on target

Some will say that speed of shooting is far too slow. Others won't have any idea because they've never used a shot timer. Clearly, I don't spend a great deal of time trying to shoot as fast as I can. But hits to misses between a 9mm pushing maybe 323ftlbs, and a .357sig pushing 559ftlbs, wasn't much different. As far as the difference is split times goes, it didn't end up being much by the end of the 50 round sessions.

I wish I had the times from the begining of the 9mm session to compare and contrast those, but it seems I didn't write them down. At worst we could say the 9mm was 0.30s split at the start (though my notes say I got "down" to that), and the .357sig started at an average of 0.45s. That's an increase of 50% which is significant. But the difference is energy is also significant, at a 73% increase. And when considering defensive ammunition for 9mm is generally more powerful, we can also assume the 9mm might become more of a handful. We should also consider that the .357sig range load (my reloads) are more powerful than the factory ammunition I typically carry.

I don't work with a shot time much these days. I try to be accurate enough, as fast as I can, with whatever gun I'm shooting. But this simple testing showed me that a more powerful cartridge isn't much of a burden where recoil is concern for me.

If you really think about the .40 S&W and what it gives, which is a 9mm sized gun with 9mm like capacity but with a bigger bullet that can get within 100 fps of a full on 10mm, you quickly realize that the .40 S&W may very well be..... THE PERFECT CARTRIDGE ... for personal protection. It both tastes great and is less filling. Pure satisfaction all the way around.

I played with 9mm and 40 with a shot timer. If I measure rapid fire per second;

9mm splits as quick as .20 = 5 shots per sec

40S&W splits as slow as .25 = 4 shots per sec

My first shot on target average was identical because a g17 is basically identical to a g22.

SDGlock23 said:

If you really think about the .40 S&W and what it gives, which is a 9mm sized gun with 9mm like capacity but with a bigger bullet that can get within 100 fps of a full on 10mm, you quickly realize that the .40 S&W may very well be..... THE PERFECT CARTRIDGE ... for personal protection. It both tastes great and is less filling. Pure satisfaction all the way around.

Click to expand...

Jeff Cooper thought so. He was a proponent of the .40 caliber. He thought a 200gr bullet moving at 1000 fps would be good for a LEO service weapon.

Easy enough to get close with a 180 at 1000 FPS.

Slamfire said:

Today, the "Ballistic Golden Standard" for inprint writers is water filled milk jugs, so we know, today, as then, in print writers are on the prowl trash day, emptying trash containers for their ballistic media. And readers still have not figured out why trash is the in print ballistic standard.

Click to expand...

Context, context

mcb said:

USPSA competition is a great place to watch how lower recoil speeds things up.

Click to expand...

Just my 2 cents on this most competitors try to stay close to the floor power factor as there is no advantage shooting more.
USPSA minor floor is 125 and your basic standard pressure 115gr@ 1125 9mm is about perfect at 129.
Major floor is 170 my FBI over run surplus Winchester Ranger T bonded 180gr runs 975fps for a 175.5 PF.
9mm defense ammo is 150-155 PF so the gap from minor to major is much greater than the difference between SD loading.