Maybe THIS Will Spur GLOCK...

Status
Not open for further replies.
My sense is a slim .40 S&W model from Glock would do just fine in the sales marketplace.
Many folks have plenty of full-size .40 S&W models at home...along with lots of stored ammo.

Those buyers might not be interested in adding yet another handgun caliber to their household.
That said...that .40 S&W in that M&P Shield certainly is nice!
 
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.

Another good analysis of the conditions leading up to the "1986 Miami-Dade Shootout," and the aftermath.







GR
 
My sense is a slim .40 S&W model from Glock would do just fine in the sales marketplace.
Many folks have plenty of full-size .40 S&W models at home...along with lots of stored ammo.

Those buyers might not be interested in adding yet another handgun caliber to their household.
That said...that .40 S&W in that M&P Shield certainly is nice!

Added the G36 .45 ACP, a new cartridge for me at the time, as a slimline CCW alternative to the Go-to-War G23.4.

Then, as now, the .40 was stacked high'n'deep.


Although... the new .45 ACP 1911 MilSpec had plenty of ammo to run when it showed up.

:D




GR
 
I have nothing but respect for the .40 and my G23 is as my first and still favorite Glock. But i rarely carry it any more. Been thinking about a Gen 5 23 lately as I’ve heard they are very nice shooters.

but I don’t think I’d be a buyer of a G43X or G48 .40. I don’t really like the G27 as it is too hard for follow up shots (for me). I suspect the 48 would be worse (again, for me).

For two legged aggression, it’s 9MM anymore for me. G23 only comes along (or a .45/10MM) if I’m headed to the boonies.

Not saying Glock shouldn’t make it...but I am in the camp that thinks they won’t.

I do think a single stack 10MM is on the way. Just a hunch.
 
I've just recently started buying reloading supplies for .40S&W. The prices for .40 brass have taken a massive nose-dive since the plandemic was launched. Projectiles are the same as for 10mm so they're not a problem and prices seem to be stable - for the post-panic /-plandemic era and compared to everything else that's not "hot" with the "in crowd." I'm finding real bargains on some lead and brass for .40 also. I don't have dies yet but I'm also not in a hurry. I'm only considering it in anticipation of the big box ammo makers not making .40 in any kind of volume anymore.
 
I have to think the micro double stacks like the new Shield Plus or the 365/Hellcat will accelerate the shift toward 9mm for concealed carriers. Losing a round with a 40 vs a 9mm is one thing, but on a Shield Plus (for instance) you are now comparing 14 rounds to 8 rounds with the extended factory mag. That's a pretty hefty drop in capacity for the same size pistol.
 
How adults view you...

:D




GR

The thread is asking about making a subcompact 40, it's a terrible idea. Makers know this because like I said the 40 is unique in tearing guns apart from the inside in a pistol platform as it is, only gets worse the smaller you make it.

It's a high pressure round, same as 357sig or 45gap. They just don't mix in tiny framed handguns.

It's not a caliber war, it's just reality that the gun you want is a bad idea.
 
Gonna stop logging in to THR with my first cup of coffee of my morning... feel as though I just awakened in 1990.

Discussion of the .40 S&W caliber turns into FBI bashing, 9mm-bashing, then re-hashes arguments made, and subsequently lost, more than 20 years ago.

Aside from the obvious (that the 9mm bullet development has produced some very capable ballistics and real-world results), and having been in the field for lo, these past many years, I'm pretty confident in my opinion that overall, folks in law enforcement shoot the 9mm much better than the .40. I'd rather be out there with folks who can shoot whatever they're carrying proficiently, than rely on a specific caliber to get the job done.

As to the OP, I find myself in agreement with Mr. Yo Mama... there are a few good reasons the market for sub-compact .40s has withered on the vine. And subcompact guns in forty, even standard loads, can be as miserable to shoot as Airweight j-frames with +P or in .357.
 
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.

1. So no cal wars, but alot of what you stated I will have to have a response for accuracy.

2. Lots has changed with 9mm in last 30 years, like down to propellants designed for shorter barrel ccw, and hollow point designed to not clog. The guns themselves have also improved.

3. 45 is not a man stopper, ridiculous term, stopping power doesn't happen until you move into long guns. (And I'm a huge 45 fan)

4. It's "effective", not "affective"

5. My carry subcompact 45 holds 10, extended mag of 13 for a reload. Plenty for ccw. And it's pretty small, not pocket gun, but real close. Small grip no issue.
 
I don't like 40s and I REALLY don't like them in a compact. All the extra snappy recoil velocity the 40 generates vs a 9mm snaps even more in a lightweight gun.
 
Gonna stop logging in to THR with my first cup of coffee of my morning... feel as though I just awakened in 1990.

Discussion of the .40 S&W caliber turns into FBI bashing, 9mm-bashing, then re-hashes arguments made, and subsequently lost, more than 20 years ago.

Aside from the obvious (that the 9mm bullet development has produced some very capable ballistics and real-world results), and having been in the field for lo, these past many years, I'm pretty confident in my opinion that overall, folks in law enforcement shoot the 9mm much better than the .40. I'd rather be out there with folks who can shoot whatever they're carrying proficiently, than rely on a specific caliber to get the job done.

As to the OP, I find myself in agreement with Mr. Yo Mama... there are a few good reasons the market for sub-compact .40s has withered on the vine. And subcompact guns in forty, even standard loads, can be as miserable to shoot as Airweight j-frames with +P or in .357.

Old Dog, I’m just replying so people can read your post twice. Could not be better summed up.
 
All I’ll add to this thread is that there is a place for the .40 S&W. According to Larry Mudget (Marksmanship Matters), Jeff Cooper felt the .40 caliber with a 200 grain bullet at 1000 FPS was a great choice for Law Enforcement:

http://www.marksmanshipmatters.com/jeff-cooper-on-40-handguns/

But that’s a pretty stout load, and I’d probably not want to shoot it in a smaller handgun.

Then again, I’m not much of a fan of .357 or larger in a snub nose...
 
Topic: "Maybe THIS Will Spur GLOCK to chamber the G48 in .40 S&W." followed by pic of M&P .40 Shield.
M&P Shield Specs: Caliber 40 S&W; Capacity 6+1, 7+1; Length 6.1 x Barrel Length 3.1” (7.9 cm) x Weight 17.6 oz.
Glock G48 Specs: Caliber 9x19mm; Capacity (Standard) 10+1; Length 7.28 inch x Barrel Length 4.17" x Weight (with empty magazine) 20.74 oz

They're not twins, but they are similar.

However, the topic is NOT whether .40 is better than 9 or who can pound their chest and pout better, it's about whether S&W making a new compact .40 will effect Glock's product line decisions. In my opinion, it won't. That's my opinion and I could easily be wrong. That opinion is based on these observations: Glock is driven very much and almost exclusively by military and police contract purchasing, NOT the civilian micro-auto, quasi-professional or semi-professional, non-LEO concealed-carry market. Police small arms buying - for whatever reasons, good or bad - is driven by the FBI's standard field weapon choices. The FBI chose Col. Cooper's brain-child, the 10mm Auto, so the industry responded. The FBI rethought that decision and went to the industry to demand a new 10mm, and the industry responded. The FBI has decided that was a bad idea as well and is going back to the 9mm, so the police and military small arms manufacturing industry is responding.
 
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"

First I dig .40. I think it’s actually a pretty great round for SD. I don’t think it is vastly superior to any other modern martial caliber but I am not a .40 hater.

Second the Miami shootout was not a caliber failure it was a combination of last minute tactics, bringing a handgun to a rifle fight and going toe to toe with an assailant who had the mental fortitude to BRING THE FIGHT and NEVER MENTALLY LOSE THE FIGHT. It’s no different then that cop who pumped like 3 mags of .45 from a G21 into an attacker and it took a Mellon shot to take the fight out of him.

The reality is the change that should have been made was to put a carbine in every car and to roll with those on a felony stop. Just my take on things.
 
Now I for one don’t understand the .40 vitriol. It is a very proven round. That hasn’t changed. 9mm is absolutely the Goldilocks round in terms capability, shoot ability size and capacity but if you shoot .40 or .45 well it certainly won’t be ballistically insignificant or conversely hugely more significant. Shoot what you like and remember anything worth shooting is worth shooting again and again and again. :)
 
I have nothing but respect for the .40 and my G23 is as my first and still favorite Glock. But i rarely carry it any more. Been thinking about a Gen 5 23 lately as I’ve heard they are very nice shooters.

but I don’t think I’d be a buyer of a G43X or G48 .40. I don’t really like the G27 as it is too hard for follow up shots (for me)....

The problem w/ the G27 - is slide, and cycle, length.

A correctly sprung G48/.40 - should recoil just slightly harder due to reduced slide weight, and hit the same, as the G23.

Plenty manageable w/ 180 gr. ammo.




GR
 
Now I for one don’t understand the .40 vitriol. It is a very proven round. That hasn’t changed. 9mm is absolutely the Goldilocks round in terms capability, shoot ability size and capacity but if you shoot .40 or .45 well it certainly won’t be ballistically insignificant or conversely hugely more significant. Shoot what you like and remember anything worth shooting is worth shooting again and again and again. :)

Defense Attorney: "Why did you shoot my client 13 times when he allegedly assaulted you...?"

Victim: "Well... the slide locked back... and by the time I reloaded, he was no longer a threat to me."

:D




GR
 
Defense Attorney: "Why did you shoot my client 13 times when he allegedly assaulted you...?"

Victim: "Well... the slide locked back... and by the time I reloaded, he was no longer a threat to me."

:D




GR
Uh, no, actually it went more like this....
Prosecutor: Your pistol held nine rounds and you only fired six. That means you weren't really in fear for your life, doesn't it?
Accused: No, it means after six rounds to the chest he finally fell down dead. I didn't think it was necessary to keep shooting at that point.
 
I don't like 40s and I REALLY don't like them in a compact. All the extra snappy recoil velocity the 40 generates vs a 9mm snaps even more in a lightweight gun.

The .40 is to the modern 10mm - as the .308 is to the M2 30-06.


There is a reason both stop-watch and new shooters love the 9mm and 6.5 CM.

... and would consider neither as a bear defense round.

Hits count.
Good hits count more.
Bigger hits count more.
More hits count more.




GR
 
Last edited:
Uh, no, actually it went more like this....
Prosecutor: Your pistol held nine rounds and you only fired six. That means you weren't really in fear for your life, doesn't it?
Accused: No, it means after six rounds to the chest he finally fell down dead. I didn't think it was necessary to keep shooting at that point due to current ammo shortage.

FIFY
 
The .40 is to the modern 10mm - as the .308 is to the M2 30-06.


There is a reason both stop-watch and new shooters love the 9mm and 6.5 CM.

... and would consider neither as a bear defense round.

Hits count.
Good hits count more.
Bigger hits count more.
More hits count more.




GR
“To repeat, bullet size does matter when trying to stop a large land mammal like a human being.”
- Special Agent Edmundo Mireles, FBI (ret.)

That’s not my opinion. It’s the opinion of a recognized expert on the subject.
 
I’m not going to jump into the caliber wars except to say that I own a version of the gun(s) I carry in both 9mm and 40. One of the main reasons I haven’t picked up a P365xl is because they don’t offer it in 40. I like having purchase options for factory defensive ammo in lean times.
 
So, which department ordered Glock 42?
Don’t be coy. Passive aggressive behavior is just annoying. If you disagree just say so and present your alternative theory. What do you think is motivating Glocks decisions and what makes you think so?
 
I'm only jumping in to caliber wars here to say that with modern effective jhp the settled science says that there isnt enough difference to really matter between 9mm/40/45.

All these loads are designed now to effectively expand and defeat barriers without over penetration on target. If a 45 and a 9mm both expand to say ... .70 and penetrate 16 inches which is more effective?

The folks with more data and testing moved back to 9mm because it does it with less recoil and more capacity. It's currently the king again due to ammo science getting the smaller lighter projectiles to open up reliably and behave like the heavier projectiles while staying lighter etc.

The future probably looks like even lighter bottle necked rounds, minimal recoil, engineered to penetrate and expand effectively while continuing to up available ammo on hand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top