carbuncle
Member
I love .40, just got set up to reload it and my safe keeps attracting more pistols in it!
Last edited:
Again, this is based on the incorrect assumption that terminal performance is either the only thing that matters, or that it is the most important factor in choosing a self-defense handgun. It also glosses over a relatively complex evaluation of performance--one, which in my opinion is impossible to self-assess--with the few words "the maximum you can handle".Because handgun effectiveness has always been a marginal proposition -- use the maximum *you* can handle! Any improvements that help the 9mm would make the .40 & .45 even better!
For starters, there is no such animal as .40S&W+P. Yet we have 9mm, 9mm NATO, +P and +P+.If the 9mm has gotten better due to advances in bullets and powders then how is it that the same advances haven't made the .40 better also?
Shoot anything other than paper with both and it's clear that .40>9mm.
Neither is there a +P+. Anything Past SAAMI specs can technically be considered +P but there is no standard for +P+ Pressures.For starters, there is no such animal as .40S&W+P. Yet we have 9mm, 9mm NATO, +P and +P+.
.40 S&W going the way of the dinosaurs?
.40 S&W going the way of the dinosaurs?
No more 40 cal for my dept, only 9mm and 45.
kynoch said:Most know why the .40 Short & Weak came about. Sad that it did too because helped to put a superior caliber (10mm) on the back burner -- at least so far.
It's honest to ask if the .40 is still advantageous over a 9mm given the bullet development over the past 25+ years with regard to defensive use? The clear answer is absolutely no. One would need to neck-down the .40 case to 9mm (AKA .357 SIG) for the .40 to outperform the 9mm.