.40 S&W vs. .45 ACP

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like the XD45: 13+1 rounds, very easy to shoot fast since recoil isn't snappy, and 230 grain bullets trump a little extra velocity with small ones IMO.

I'm not shooting through car doors with it, and I have very hard LSWC .44 Magnums going a good deal faster if I ever need that.:)

If I had to choose between 8 rounds of .45 and 15 of .40, that might change the equation. However, I don't have to make that choice, with a modern double stack.
 
Inara: You don't need strength as much as speed. We're fragile creatures. It takes less than a pound of pressure to cut skin.
Mal: You know that? They teach you that in whore academy?
 
.40 180 grain going 1159 fps? What ammo is this?
The tables were generated using JBM's calculator with Hodgdon load data.

For the purposes of this inquiry, I used the fastest load (fps) data for each selected weight in each selected caliber. This information was gleaned from the Hodgdon reload data tables. I would add a direct link, but their liability page won't let you get directly there. The table lists a max load of 8gr. Hodgdon Longshot pushing a Hornady 180 gr. XTP @32,300psi.

I never fail to be amazed at the thoughtful responses of forum members to my questions. I appreciate that about this forum.

After reading all of your posts, I conclude that there is a general concensus to the following:
A handgun you shoot well will outperform a handgun you shoot less well, regardless of caliber or energy transfered (within limits, .22 probably isn't a great choice for SD, nor is .50BMG practical).

Where the above seems obvious, I was curious to know if ballistics data could support it.

My initial conclusion is that it will not.

Thanks, everyone. I appreciate the input.

RK
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top