.40 cal carry gun preference

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Encoreman

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
759
Location
on the edge, Tn.
Hi, I am looking at a carry gun in .40 cal.The main reason for the .40 is I reload for .40 and I don't want to have to gear up for a 9mm. What are you using? I want reliability #1, size and weight # 2, cost # 3. Give me your opinions. Thanks Mac
 
.40's for ccw are tuff. Most are large, thick and or heavy. I finally picked up a KAHR pm40 and haven't looked back. Truth be told big guns and or heavy guns are nice to talk about but usually left at home. In every day life i wasn't willing to wear the frumpy loose jeans or untucked shirt nor put up with the weight on the hip. The Kahr is way concealable IWB and after the hole day working construction I am no worse for having carried it. This I cannot say about my Sig P229, or SW 1911, Para-Carry or even the Kahr Elite...an all stainless version of the PM40 I owned and loved.
Truth is after two years carring the PM40 I went even further into the lightweight and bought a SW 340PD.. a scandium "J" frame 357/38 that rides in my right front pocket everywhere. Now this is truly serious firepower in a concealable, all day carry package.
 
I have a PM40 and love it...the size and weight are hard to beat though it is a little pricey. The Glock 27 and Beretta Mini-Cougar are other good choices.
 
I EDC a G22, but a G23 or G27 would work fine if you don't want to deal with the heft of a full size handgun.
 
Xd 40 4"

I have the 4" XD 40 and will ccw it some times. Think Holsters. I am new to guns and have other self imposed financial obligations. I think my XD would be more carry friendly if I had a better holster. Right now I just use the factory one that came with the kit. I wear it best with a hoodie or better yet fleace with a waist draw string. I cinch the draw string just enough to have it snug underneath the business end of the pistol. I'm 6' 210 so the fleace 'poofs' out enough to prevent printing.

I admit it isn't the best carry piece- I'm saving for a S&W M60 magnaport... Mmmm.

If you like the way compacts and subcompacts feel when shooting give them a whirl. I don't. The XD fits the reliability bill. And after seeing how tedious it is for my buddy to disasemble his Kimber Ultra Carry I realized I appreciate the simplicity of the XD.

Pics when you decide!!
 
I carry my FULL SIZE M&P for every day that I legally can. But if I were doing it again I would by a compact. But the M&P is super great.
 
I'm carrying an H&K P2000 lately. It is small and light enough to carry (but I confess to wearing suspenders) and big and heavy enough to shoot well and not be abusive in recoil. Sights are good, trigger is more than adequate and controls are about as good as most other new guns.

Probably a bit spendy, but there just ain't no free lunch.
 
Though my preference is for a 45 ACP, your thoughts about reloading already for 40 (vs 9 mm) seems a very reasonable justification to me. I am assuming you are using reloads for practice and factory defensive loads for CCWing. Lots of firearms to choose from. Personally I like Sigs and XDs but you should go out and shoot a few different makes and models if you don't already have a preference. All modern major manufactures make fine pistols.
 
When i carry a forty

It is usually my duty gun, an H&K P2000. I am not found of it and prefer the old carry gun, a BERETTA 96D Brigadier. This is a LARGE gun and not really good for a concealled weapon unless you live up north.

I also have a BERETTA 96D Centurion which is a little shorter and lighter. I like them for a house gun or car gun, but usually carry a smaller 9m.m. for concealed carry.

RELIABILITY is as good as it gets in my experience. Size is LARGE and weight is about 2 pounds which may or may not be too heavy. With a pancake holster it is fine. Cost is good. You can buy a demo or unissued police BERETTA for under $400.00, ususally with night sites included.

Jim
 
Uh, he said he wasn't playing with 9's ( and that is what a .38 is...)
I have a Keltec P40, and I only shot it with 180gn, but not a pleasent pistol, maybe with a tamed lighter weight round I could do better, but as ist is, I would advise a heavier frame, or you end up looking for a better ammo combination

However, since you reload, that shouldn't be a problem, a medium loaded 135 HP would work wonders.
 
Sig p229. Not very small but very accurate and never had a problem. Also came with a .357 sig barrel. It 1s easy to convert and uses the same mags.
 
WEG has the right idea. If you can carry a mid-size revolver, you can carry a 22 or 23 or equivalent.

If you can carry a J-Frame, chances are better than not (minus pocket carry, wayyyy too subjective for me to help with) that you can absolutely carry a Glock 27.

And the 27 will hit harder, recoil equally or less, be just as accurate but most likely easier to shoot, hold twice as many rounds, reload much quicker and easier, and be much easier to recover from any potential malfunctions.

Honestly, when I was waiting on my carry permit, I bought a 27 while disliking the entire Glock platform. Now I know better. All of the platforms for the most part have a use, and the Glock platform is exceptionally well suited to any use that involves either carry or user-motivated modification.

Also the 27 is SUPER accurate, and by dimensions alone, definitely beats out anything else in the same category without dropping from the "service subcompact" to the "subcompact carry gun", yes a CW40 by Kahr is a bit smaller and lighter, but put 300 rounds through one in a session, and tell me you wouldn't rather just put up with the extra fifth of an inch of width of the Glock for the extra shootability and four rounds.
 
I want reliability #1, size and weight # 2, cost # 3. Give me your opinions.
Click to expand...
#1- Most modern polymer .40 sub compacts are reliable (Glock,XD,M&P,PM)
#2- PM wins hands down with the other 3 all about the same.
#3- XD wins hands down since i can buy them locally for $399-$429 for the full package.

Glock is thick and pricey.
M&P is both of those also.
XD is thick but less expensive.
PM is thinnest and smallest but least capacity also and the most expensive.

One thing to not forget is to hold each and see how it fits your hands and how you like the trigger pull.

I carry a 5" 1911 75% of the year, But in the summer ive switched too the XD subcompact .40 and i couldn't be happier.
My second choice would have been a tie with the Glock and Kahr PM as i like different features of both even tho they are very different when comparing them to themselves.
M&P last, I just couldn't like that gun, But while looking at it the shop had a used but like new P99 S&W and i almost bout that gun as it was heads and toes better than the M&P imo.
Thats just my opinion M&P guys, Your gun is a very good gun. Its just not one i liked for some reason.

On a Different angle Taurus makes the PT140 which is around $350 and smaller than all of the above besides the PM and is known for being reliable.
But many people dislike Taurus on forums so i have a hard time recommending them unless people say they are open to them. I had the same version in a single stack .45 PT745 and it was a hard gun to beat for the price and only the Kahr PM45 could out do it in size and weight but at 2x the price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top