Does the .40 S&W Just Need More Time?

Seems it(.40S&W) needs to be in a larger gun than a typical midsize 9MM, which,at that point, might as well be chambered for 10MM and "called done".
Josh

Who would've thought that an FBI stakeout gone bad in Florida 22 years ago would prompt this much angst in the shooting community.

I see only one drawback for the .40S&W: It simply doesn't have a stellar reputation for accuracy. Tackdriver .45's have been around for eons and much progress has been made making the 9mm shoot bughole groups with the AMU's reworking of the M9 for EIC matches and even some of the stuff coming out of the Smith and Wesson custom shop as well. No so much for the .40 S&W.

I own pistols in all 3 calibers and do not carry one over the other. 9mm/.40/.45 - Put the bullet where it needs to go and they'll all work.

I own pistols in all 3 calibers and do not carry one over the other. 9mm/.40/.45 - Put the bullet where it needs to go and they'll all work.

Click to expand...

I agree whole heartedly with this statement. Proper bullet placement is the key.


I will say that my CZ 40B is the equal in accuracy with my SIGs (P6, P220 and P226).

I love everything about the 40 S&W but the price of ammo. It's got size and speed. I believe it's proven itself a reliable man stopper as much as any other caliber.

I don't think it needs more time, it's great now.

I guess when you shoot a 50 cal hand gun nothing less then that is SNAPPY anymore.

In my opinion, there's only 4 calibers to consider owning for self defense:

1. 9mm
2. 45ACP
3. 357mag/38special
4. 10mm

Everything else is unnecessary and not much better than experimental. That 40 caliber that all the cops are so enamored with is only barely more powerful than your run of the mill 9mm+P ammo. And guess what? There's no such thing as 40 +P. So as far as I'm concerned, 40cal is just wasting space in your magazine.

357sig has impressive ballistics. But I don't care. It's not as impressive as 10mm and you can fit as many 10mm in a mag as you can 357sig. So there's no point in 357sig.

If you check prices on used beretta 92fs handguns, you will find that the 40caliber ones are cheaper than the 9mm.

Loomis said:

That 40 caliber that all the cops are so enamored with is only barely more powerful than your run of the mill 9mm+P ammo. And guess what? There's no such thing as 40 +P. So as far as I'm concerned, 40cal is just wasting space in your magazine.

Click to expand...

I don't quite understand the logic behind your statement that the 40SW is "wasting space in your magazine" because it isn't offered in a +P version. The 40SW doesn't need a +P loading to achieve greater performance.

Using Remington Golden Saber ballistics, the 124gr 9mm Luger leaves the muzzle at 1125fps with 349 ft/lb energy, dropping to 293 ft/lb at 50 yards. The same bullet in a +P loading gives you 1180fps with 384 ft/lb energy at the muzzle, falling to 327 ft/lb at 50 yards.

The 165gr Golden Saber .40SW leaves the muzzle at 1150fps, with 485ft/lb of energy, falling to 396 at 50 yards.

When compared to the 9mm +P, the 40SW leaves the muzzle 2.6% slower but has 26% more energy at the muzzle and 21% more energy at 50 yards. I'm no expert, but I'd say a 20% increase in energy is a fair bit more than "barely more powerful".

If you prefer a 9mm to the 40 that's all well and good, but to say the 40 is "wasting space in your magazine" because it isn't offered in +P is a pretty weak argument...

YEP. 9mm, the 223 of the pistol world!

My big issue with the 40 Smith is that I keep picking up the brass at the range, thinking it's 45 ACP.

I hate that!

Click to expand...

<Shrug> Send it all to me, and I'll filter out the .40.

The 40 S&W is a great round - no doubt about it! I guess some people are just entrenched with 9mm and 45 ACP, but there is room for the 40, and always has been.

13 to 15 rounds of 40 S&W is tough to beat.

The .40 has already arrived in fine style over here.

In any comparison of the 9mm vs .40S&W, for me its all about the availability of superior bullet weights for the .40. Consider the many variables and unknowns that are probable in a defensive encounter and the 9mm's necessarily limited choice in this critical area becomes very, very disconcerting.

We've all heard about "placement". Well it's about more than placement when you need your bullet to have enough left after it penetrates some heavy clothes, car doors, windshields or whatever.

Add in the real benefit of its extra capacity (and better ergos) over many .45's - and all is more than well.

W

Although many might argue, I believe most detractors (including myself) believe that it just doesn't do anything another cartridge could do better. It doesn't hold as many rounds as the 9mm, it's not as big as the .45, and it's not as powerful as the 10mm. So basically it serves no real purpose.

Click to expand...

I would guess that you have large hands. I don't. A double column auto in .45acp is pretty much useless to me. I can't comfortably hold it, so what's the point?

The .40S&W is more powerful than the 9x19mm, while capable of operating in the same class of firearm as the 9x19mm.

The 10mm isn't as powerful as the .500 Linebaugh. It's also more controllable, and the .40S&W is more controllable in turn than it is. The .40S&W is as powerful as it needs to be in a package comfortable for the majority of shooters to use.

Seems it(.40S&W) needs to be in a larger gun than a typical midsize 9MM, which,at that point, might as well be chambered for 10MM and "called done".

Click to expand...

Some .40S&W guns need to be HEAVIER, not LARGER. I can't comfortably shoot an S&W 1006 sized gun, so what's the use? My Glock 22 is an ideal size for my hand, as would be a Glock 23. The 10mm Glock 20 BARELY fits my hand and isn't comfortable. The problem with my Glock 22 is that for MY tastes, it's a bit light for optimimum controllability. That could probably be countered by some sort of weight in the grip frame, behind the magazine compartment, held in place by the sort of removeable cap that people sell. Or perhaps a one piece combined cap/weight could be developed.

The 40SW has been around 18 years. In that time, it has come to dominate LE handguns sales, and has also garnered a large portion of the civilan market. Is it a death ray? No, and neither is the 45ACP, or the 10mm, or the 9mm, or the 460 Rowland. It's useful, fits in guns that your average Joe can get his fingers around, and shoots a moderate-caliber bullet at a reasonable velocity, with good terminal ballistics. Like any caliber, it has its fans and its detractors. I like it, I load it, and I shoot it a lot. I also load and shoot 38, 357, 44, and 45. The 40 fits nicely in the middle.

It, like nearly any other caliber on the planet, works best when the bullet goes where it's asposed-ta.

PJ

If you check prices on used beretta 92fs handguns, you will find that the 40caliber ones are cheaper than the 9mm.

Click to expand...

And the price of used handguns has what to do with the effectivness and purpose of the round?

Loomis,

I'm looking at some reloading data and see a few loads that push 165 & 170gr. bullets to 1,300 FPS and 180gr. bullets to 1,100 FPS - I could care less if they call it +P, Short & Whimpy, or anything else - the fact is it works!

It does exactly what it was intended to do - provide 45 ACP type performance in a 9mm size gun.

ltlabner;

The price of used handguns being higher for 9mm than for 40 proves that 9mm is in greater demand. That's saying something since there are so many more 9mm guns available than 40s.

Apparently, no one wants 40 cal in the used market.

BoilerUP; It's wasting space in your magazine because you can't fit as many 40s in a given mag length as you can 9mm and you aren't getting anything to speak of, in trade in terms of punch, for that sacrifice in mag capacity.

You arn't quoting very good numbers imo. A good "average" number(for top quality defense ammo) for 9mm is 340 ft-lb muzzle energy. For 40 cal, that would be 485 ft-lb. For 9mm+P, 435 ft-lbs for 90 grain slugs. If you go to corbon powRball, the number is higher yet.

435 vs 485 is not enough of a difference to make me go to 40 cal. I havn't even begun to talk about 9mm +P+, or +P++.

SDDL-UP; I must admit I am not considering hand loads. Factory ammo only. Most people DON'T use handloads for self defense.

IMHO the 40S&W is the perfect round. Big enough but not to big, right capacity and fits into smaller form factor guns which is a plus for carry purposes.

Can somebody tell me why muzzle energy figures are relevant? Is there a point where a bullet has enough muzzle energy to have "Stopping Power", or "Knockdown Power, or some other mythical, non-existant property?

At the risk of being redundant, muzzle energy figures are horribly skewed in favor of the lighter, faster bullets. The formula is velocity SQUARED times mass. It's a horrible system of measurement. Is a 17 Remington going 4,100 feet a second a good stopper? Muzzle energy says yes..........reality says no.

Tell you what. You stand 15 yards away, wearing a modern ballistic vest. I'll shoot you once each with three rounds, a 147-grain 9mm, a 155-grain 40, and a 165-grain 45. You tell me which is which.

These kind of debates are for those with nothing better to worry about.

Papajohn

It has been around since 1990. How much more time does it need, and for what?

I don't care for it, especially in small guns, due to the bark and bite.

ltlabner;

The price of used handguns being higher for 9mm than for 40 proves that 9mm is in greater demand. That's saying something since there are so many more 9mm guns available than 40s.

Apparently, no one wants 40 cal in the used market.

Click to expand...

Still not sure how that relates at all to the effectiveness of the .40S&W round.

I have the most current CDNN cataloge in my hand.

Beretta 92F (9mm) $319
Beretta 96 (.40) $319

S&W 5906 (9mm) $299 - $319 depending on grade
S&W 4006 (.40) $299 to $349 depending on grade

S&W Sigma (9mm) $289
S&W Sigma (.40) $289

That's three quick examples with about three seconds of effort.

The price of 9mm isn't "higher" than .40. Some individual weapons might be higher, some might be lower than .40. But when you make absolutes, it's really easy to prove them wrong.

And your statement about "nobody wants them on the used market" also makes little to no sense.

Latley I've purched 4 used .40S&W on the used market. So "somebody" does, in fact, want them.

loomis said:

BoilerUP; It's wasting space in your magazine because you can't fit as many 40s in a given mag length as you can 9mm and you aren't getting anything to speak of, in trade in terms of punch, for that sacrifice in mag capacity.

Click to expand...

Yes you can't fit as many as in a magazine as a 9mm, but I have indeed proven to you with fact-based figures that you get a 20%+ increase in energy with the 40SW than even a 9mm +P.

You arn't quoting very good numbers imo. A good "average" number(for top quality defense ammo) for 9mm is 340 ft-lb muzzle energy. For 40 cal, that would be 485 ft-lb. For 9mm+P, 435 ft-lbs for 90 grain slugs. If you go to corbon powRball, the number is higher yet.

435 vs 485 is not enough of a difference to make me go to 40 cal. I havn't even begun to talk about 9mm +P+, or +P++.

Click to expand...

Remington's own ballistics information for Golden Sabers at common 9mm defensive bullet weights isn't "very good numbers"???

I'm pretty new to THR but I've never heard anybody advocate using 90gr bullets for defensive 9mm applications...and it would appear Hydra-Shok, Gold Dot, Golden Saber factory loadings support that hypothesis. Regardless, the 40SW 165gr Golden Saber has 485lb energy at the muzzle, whereas the 9mm 115gr JHP P+ Remington loading (the lightest and hottest they offer) has 399lb energy...that's still 21% more!

More importantly, you've failed to address that in order to achieve performance even close to the 40SW you have to WAY hotrod out the 9mm to get there.

You really like the 9mm, and that's great...but your logic for saying its superior to the 40SW because you 1. hold more 9mm in a magazine and 2. can get P+ loadings for it is extremely flawed.

It doesn't hold as many rounds as the 9mm, it's not as big as the .45...

Click to expand...

Yeah, but it holds more rounds than the .45 and it's bigger than the 9mm.

I HAVE HAD ALL THE ABOVE
IM a big 45acp fan, my carry gun is one of these, cia38+p, 40scxd, xd45acp, SW 10 mm. depending on time of year.
I had a 9mm a few times and traded them off,
would I buy another.
Yes,.
would it be one of the first to grab to trade off,
yes.
call me crazy but IMO, 9mm just does not have the stopping power im wanting.
most 9mm do have a large cap mag and can put a lot of rounds down range.

(XD45 HOLDS 13+1) WERE MOST 9MM HOLD 16.IM STICKING WITH THE XD.

With shot placement you wont need a mag full of 9mm.
but IM guessing in a real gun battle, we wont be thinking about shot placement, just spray and pray.
Guess my back up mags could be some of them 30 rounders OR ONE OF THEM 65 rd DRUMS FOR THE 1911, then I could spray and pray with some 45acp.

that should get the bad guys attention.

So far I understand that the cons of a .40 are it doesnt hold as many rounds as a 9mm, and doesn't have the "punch" of a .45... The pros of the .40 are it has more of a "punch" than a 9mm, and holds more than .45....... ...Own atleast one of each, I like them all. Personal preference, Duty-.40 , CCW-.40