DeepSouth
Random Guy
No offence but I have better things to do.
How about you prove me wrong.
40 s&w vs 45acp
- Thread starter Antihero
- Start date
- Status
No offence but I have better things to do.
How about you prove me wrong.
REAPER4206969
Member
Do you know how many private citizens have defended them selves in car jackings? Are you really suggesting that if I shoot an attacker out of or through my car that is attempting to kill me or inflict great bodily harm upon me that it is not justified simply because I am sitting in an automobile? If an attacker is using a car as a weapon and is trying to run over me or a loved one and I shoot him through his windshield it is not a good shoot? Why is it okay for a cop to defend him self in the same situation but not a private citizen? Are their lives more valuable than ours? Should I just let my attacker kill me just because I, or he is in a car?
flyboy1788
Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 317
40 s&w is quite popular, but all the guns that ive fired in .40 seemed quite 'snappy' when it comes to recoil in relation to comparative 9mms and .45s. I will stick with 9mms and .45s as far as pistols are concerned
rbernie
Contributing Member
Having been through, and knowing of people who've been through, car jacking type scenarios, I will suggest that it is not uncommon to have to shoot through intermediate barriers such as car doors or car glass in defense of your life. Stating otherwise is simply not founded in fact.
If you are going to make such statement, I do believe that you have some burden placed upon you to substantiate these claims. But, in reality, making this claim was a thread drift that ought not have been introduced in the first place. That's really more of a Legal forum kind of debate....
<Mod Hat ON>
Y'all are becoming quarrelsome, and this needs to get ratcheted down a few turns. The debate is over substantive performance differences between 40S&W and 45ACP.
<Mod Hat OFF>
To address that question, I would myself chose either quite happily, so long as it was chambered in a weapon that I liked and was proficient in. Given equal choice, I would probably choose 45ACP for its all-around flexibility and familiarity. I can think of few chamberings as easy to load for or as flexible and as easy on the platform as 45ACP.
christcorp
Member
To stay on topic, I'd like to know what a 40sw can do that a 45acp can't do? There is only one reason the 40sw was even invented. Because the FBI couldn't accept the results of the 9mm; they knew the 45acp had always been the better choice; but they didn't have the confidence in only having 7-8 rounds. And for a law enforcement type of environment, where your defensive scenarios can and many times are very offensive in nature, there is a valid argument for more rounds. For a non-law enforcement scenario, where it's strictly defensive in nature, I don't believe that magazine count becomes an issue.
But, if someone wants to say that the ONLY advantage of a 40sw over a 45acp is that there are more rounds in the magazine, then there is definitely no argument there. That is definitely true. Now; whether or not you need 15-18 rounds in your gun, and you've eliminated a number of possible guns from what might have been the PERFECT gun for YOU; simply because it didn't hold 15-18 rounds; then that's a totally different subject. But magazine capacity aside, I can't think of what advantage the 40sw has over the 45acp.
But, if someone wants to say that the ONLY advantage of a 40sw over a 45acp is that there are more rounds in the magazine, then there is definitely no argument there. That is definitely true. Now; whether or not you need 15-18 rounds in your gun, and you've eliminated a number of possible guns from what might have been the PERFECT gun for YOU; simply because it didn't hold 15-18 rounds; then that's a totally different subject. But magazine capacity aside, I can't think of what advantage the 40sw has over the 45acp.
Joe Demko
Member
I can't see what significant advantage the .45 holds for real world use. Perhaps, christcorp, you can give us some actual real world examples of where the .40 failed and the .45 prevailed?
Deanimator
Member
Fit 15 rounds into a grip frame that somebody other than an orangutan or an NBA player can comfortably hold in one hand.
There are those of us who CAN'T palm a regulation basketball.
christcorp
Member
"But magazine capacity aside, I can't think of what advantage the 40sw has over the 45acp."
DEANIMATOR: Maybe the font was too small. I just spent two paragraphs acknowledging that for some people, magazine capacity seems to be important. Are you saying that you can't think of anything else either?
Demko; no one said the 40sw failed. This thread was started because someone believed that there were obvious advantages having the 40sw over having 45acp. I personally can not find any such advantages. Magazine count has never and WILL NEVER be an issue for me. I have said that for offensive uses such as law enforcement and the like, that magazine capacity is definitely a consideration. I don't believe it's an issue with civilians; however; I do recognize that there are some that feel more comfortable having the extra rounds. And perception is truth, so that's acknowledged.
As for the advantage of the 45acp, the 2 that I believe are most important; especially for those who aren't the most proficient with a gun; is that the 45acp is 10% bigger in bullet diameter and 15% in bullet weight. This means more damage to the person you shot. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a firm believer that bigger is always better. For those who are proficient, accuracy can be MORE deadly. That's why I have no problem carrying a 32acp or 9mm makarov as concealed carry in the summer months. But, if I couldn't carry concealed; and open carry was the only method; then I'd either carry my P220 45acp or my S&W model 13-1 357 magnum revolver.
And I'm definitely not dogging the 40sw. Personally, I don't really like any of the in between semi-auto calibers. Most are niche calibers or developed strictly for economic reasons. This includes the 10mm, 357sig, 327, 45gap. etc... I prefer military and LE calibers because they went through some of the best testing in their time and some of the best modifications as needed since then. In my opinion, for the person that can ONLY have ONE GUN, the choice is pretty simple. (Again, my opinion). For a semi-auto, a 9mm. I personally don't care for it, but it is definitely tried and true. And with modern day ammunition, you can cover a variety of uses and needs. This military caliber is reliable and effective. Ammo is readily available and inexpensive. If the choice was a revolver, then the choice would be a 357 magnum. With it's ability to also shoot 38 specials, the bullet weight, powder, velocity, and energy combinations are such that you can find a 357 magnum load that can equal any other hand gun with the exception of the 41/44 magnum or the hunting handgun monster rounds like the 454/460/480/etc...
But for me, I believe that NO pistol caliber is optimum for self defense. Therefor we have to make up for it's shortcomings with training, practice, and accuracy. 95% of CIVILIAN self defense using a hand gun never ever has to even pull the trigger. The mere presence of the gun is usually enough t stop the threat. The other 5 percent of the time, it's not a "Gun Fight" anywhere similar to what a police officer or similar would go through. But if a person believe that even a 0.000001% chance that it could be, warrants a 15-18 round magazine, then more power to them. But that same argument says you should have another 15-18 round magazine on you; as well as maybe a couple boxes of ammo in your pocket. Obviously, there's got to be a balance between purpose, practicality and paranoia. We have all read articles and reports where a person was shot multiple times with a 44 magnum and kept coming and even survived. And we've read articles and reports where a person dies from a single 22LR bullet.
The laws of physics says that the larger the bullet; the more it expand; and the more physical damage it can do; the better it is for self defense. However; sometimes that large weapon isn't practical. And because ALL handguns are inefficient as for self defense, there isn't a major drop in efficiency by using a 32/380/9mm for the times where the bigger gun isn't practical. And because there isn't a gun out there in 45acp that isn't basically the same size as any 40sw you can find, there becomes no advantage to having the 40sw. (Other than magazine capacity). The 45acp can do everything the 40sw can, YET with a BIGGER hole and MORE damage; and it does it with LESS kick and discomfort to the shooter. So; if you're going to carry the BIGGER guns because you want maximum tissue damage to the bad guy, then you use a 45acp. If however, you don't feel comfortable with 8 rounds in a gun; then you COMPROMISE, and get a 40sw with a 15-18 round magazine. And if you ARE COMFORTABLE with your abilities to shoot effectively, then you get ANY CALIBER HANDGUN you want that fits you perfectly. Maybe it's a glock 19 or a 21. Maybe it's a 1911A1 or a Sig P220. Maybe it's S&W 686 revolver. Maybe it's a Walther 32 or 380 PPK. In my opinion, because ALL handguns have shortcomings for self defense, the priority of choosing a gun should be:
1. Gun that fits PERFECTLY in your hands. Balance, weight, sights, ergonomics, overall feel comfortable.
2. Gun that fits the carrying purpose. Either concealed, open, non at all (For home use).
3. Gun that is comfortable in operation. If you rarely if ever shoot, and realize that adrenaline and stress are going to kick in during an actual shooting, consider a revolver that doesn't require as much "What If" knowledge. "POINT AND CLICK". Or consider the semi-auto if you're willing to practice a lot and become proficient so that the inevitable FUBAR can be corrected automatically.
4. Caliber that is the most comfortable for you to shoot. There's a lot of of weights/grains/velocities in numerous calibers. Find one that the "Average" plinking ammo is comfortable to shoot. When the time comes for actual use, you don't want a caliber/ammo that your brain is already telling you subconsciously that it's going to be uncomfortable. This caliber could be 32, 380, 9mm, 40sw, 45acp, etc...
5. And finally; if you are still so unsure or not confident in your abilities; but you practice enough that semi-autos are a practical choice; then you could prioritize the high capacity choices like the 9mm or 40sw.
DEANIMATOR: Maybe the font was too small. I just spent two paragraphs acknowledging that for some people, magazine capacity seems to be important. Are you saying that you can't think of anything else either?
Demko; no one said the 40sw failed. This thread was started because someone believed that there were obvious advantages having the 40sw over having 45acp. I personally can not find any such advantages. Magazine count has never and WILL NEVER be an issue for me. I have said that for offensive uses such as law enforcement and the like, that magazine capacity is definitely a consideration. I don't believe it's an issue with civilians; however; I do recognize that there are some that feel more comfortable having the extra rounds. And perception is truth, so that's acknowledged.
As for the advantage of the 45acp, the 2 that I believe are most important; especially for those who aren't the most proficient with a gun; is that the 45acp is 10% bigger in bullet diameter and 15% in bullet weight. This means more damage to the person you shot. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a firm believer that bigger is always better. For those who are proficient, accuracy can be MORE deadly. That's why I have no problem carrying a 32acp or 9mm makarov as concealed carry in the summer months. But, if I couldn't carry concealed; and open carry was the only method; then I'd either carry my P220 45acp or my S&W model 13-1 357 magnum revolver.
And I'm definitely not dogging the 40sw. Personally, I don't really like any of the in between semi-auto calibers. Most are niche calibers or developed strictly for economic reasons. This includes the 10mm, 357sig, 327, 45gap. etc... I prefer military and LE calibers because they went through some of the best testing in their time and some of the best modifications as needed since then. In my opinion, for the person that can ONLY have ONE GUN, the choice is pretty simple. (Again, my opinion). For a semi-auto, a 9mm. I personally don't care for it, but it is definitely tried and true. And with modern day ammunition, you can cover a variety of uses and needs. This military caliber is reliable and effective. Ammo is readily available and inexpensive. If the choice was a revolver, then the choice would be a 357 magnum. With it's ability to also shoot 38 specials, the bullet weight, powder, velocity, and energy combinations are such that you can find a 357 magnum load that can equal any other hand gun with the exception of the 41/44 magnum or the hunting handgun monster rounds like the 454/460/480/etc...
But for me, I believe that NO pistol caliber is optimum for self defense. Therefor we have to make up for it's shortcomings with training, practice, and accuracy. 95% of CIVILIAN self defense using a hand gun never ever has to even pull the trigger. The mere presence of the gun is usually enough t stop the threat. The other 5 percent of the time, it's not a "Gun Fight" anywhere similar to what a police officer or similar would go through. But if a person believe that even a 0.000001% chance that it could be, warrants a 15-18 round magazine, then more power to them. But that same argument says you should have another 15-18 round magazine on you; as well as maybe a couple boxes of ammo in your pocket. Obviously, there's got to be a balance between purpose, practicality and paranoia. We have all read articles and reports where a person was shot multiple times with a 44 magnum and kept coming and even survived. And we've read articles and reports where a person dies from a single 22LR bullet.
The laws of physics says that the larger the bullet; the more it expand; and the more physical damage it can do; the better it is for self defense. However; sometimes that large weapon isn't practical. And because ALL handguns are inefficient as for self defense, there isn't a major drop in efficiency by using a 32/380/9mm for the times where the bigger gun isn't practical. And because there isn't a gun out there in 45acp that isn't basically the same size as any 40sw you can find, there becomes no advantage to having the 40sw. (Other than magazine capacity). The 45acp can do everything the 40sw can, YET with a BIGGER hole and MORE damage; and it does it with LESS kick and discomfort to the shooter. So; if you're going to carry the BIGGER guns because you want maximum tissue damage to the bad guy, then you use a 45acp. If however, you don't feel comfortable with 8 rounds in a gun; then you COMPROMISE, and get a 40sw with a 15-18 round magazine. And if you ARE COMFORTABLE with your abilities to shoot effectively, then you get ANY CALIBER HANDGUN you want that fits you perfectly. Maybe it's a glock 19 or a 21. Maybe it's a 1911A1 or a Sig P220. Maybe it's S&W 686 revolver. Maybe it's a Walther 32 or 380 PPK. In my opinion, because ALL handguns have shortcomings for self defense, the priority of choosing a gun should be:
1. Gun that fits PERFECTLY in your hands. Balance, weight, sights, ergonomics, overall feel comfortable.
2. Gun that fits the carrying purpose. Either concealed, open, non at all (For home use).
3. Gun that is comfortable in operation. If you rarely if ever shoot, and realize that adrenaline and stress are going to kick in during an actual shooting, consider a revolver that doesn't require as much "What If" knowledge. "POINT AND CLICK". Or consider the semi-auto if you're willing to practice a lot and become proficient so that the inevitable FUBAR can be corrected automatically.
4. Caliber that is the most comfortable for you to shoot. There's a lot of of weights/grains/velocities in numerous calibers. Find one that the "Average" plinking ammo is comfortable to shoot. When the time comes for actual use, you don't want a caliber/ammo that your brain is already telling you subconsciously that it's going to be uncomfortable. This caliber could be 32, 380, 9mm, 40sw, 45acp, etc...
5. And finally; if you are still so unsure or not confident in your abilities; but you practice enough that semi-autos are a practical choice; then you could prioritize the high capacity choices like the 9mm or 40sw.
CountGlockula
Member
All I shoot are .40S&W, and I love the caliber. It does need some getting used to. Further trajectory and great stopping power, plus ammo is much more available and affordable.
Seven For Sure
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2006
- Messages
- 437
Very small gun: 9mm
Small to medium gun: 357auto or .40
Large frame: 10mm
I've got no use for .45, plan on getting down to 40, 10mm and 10mm mag (610) and reloading again. I'll stock up on .40 at WM until they raise the price. I don't shoot much 9mm so I'll buy it loaded until it get's too expensive. I've got a 646 that keeps my .40 brass tight and clean.
Small to medium gun: 357auto or .40
Large frame: 10mm
I've got no use for .45, plan on getting down to 40, 10mm and 10mm mag (610) and reloading again. I'll stock up on .40 at WM until they raise the price. I don't shoot much 9mm so I'll buy it loaded until it get's too expensive. I've got a 646 that keeps my .40 brass tight and clean.
gga357
Member
It seems to me that it boils down to the speed vs heavy debate. I like the 9mm & .40 in autos. But I like .357 and 45lc in revolvers. I run the 45lc warm, unless required to tone them down. I also do not like a grip safties. Cor-Bon has some great loads for 40SW.
Green Dragoon
Member
I carry a 40 as a duty weapon and I hate it. Its simply not a choice I have to.
1. The 40 is not accurate.
2. It is weak and a bad compromise for the real cartridge the 10mm.
3. Most of the platforms that it is used in are just sub par.
Okay I hate teh 40.
1. The 40 is not accurate.
2. It is weak and a bad compromise for the real cartridge the 10mm.
3. Most of the platforms that it is used in are just sub par.
Okay I hate teh 40.
Joe Demko
Member
"Most platforms?" Don't get carried away. The gun makers offer the .40 on largely the same platforms as they do other cartridges.
My experience indicates that if you are having an accuracy problem, it probably isn't due to an intrinsic lack of accuracy in the .40.
My experience indicates that if you are having an accuracy problem, it probably isn't due to an intrinsic lack of accuracy in the .40.
sigsteve
Member
What do you think of the Double Tap Ammo? Is it worth the extra $$ plus the shipping? Do you notice the extra power from shooting it?
10-Ring
Member
I never warmed up to the 10mm short I liked the 10mm but I never liked the kurz version -- I shot probably 5000 rounds through 4 different pistols I owned a couple range rentals and none of them did it for me. My 45s on the other hand just work -- I can shoot it faster and more accurately than most anything else
I liked the 10mm but I never liked the kurz version -- I shot probably 5000 rounds through 4 different pistols I owned a couple range rentals and none of them did it for me. My 45s on the other hand just work -- I can shoot it faster and more accurately than most anything elsegga357
Member
Double Tap:
Caliber : .45 ACP
Bullet : 230gr. Full Metal Jacket - Flat Point
Ballistics : 1010fps - 521 ft./lbs. - 5" bbl.
Caliber : .40 S&W
Bullet : Controlled Expansion JHP
Ballistics : 180gr. @ 1100fps / 484 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)
1060fps 435 ft/lbs from a 3.5"bbl.
1150fps 538 ft/lbs from a 4.5"bbl.
.357 Mag
Velocity: 1600fps / 4" Ruger GP-100
1425fps / 1 7/8" S&W
1750fps / 6"bbl S&W 686
Bullet: 125gr Bonded Defense JHP
Muzzle Energy: 710 ft. lbs.
Caliber : .45 Colt +P
Bullet : 300gr. Controlled Expansion JHP
Ballistics : 1325fps - 1170 ft./lbs. - 7.5" bbl.
1688fps from a 16.5" carbine
Caliber : .45 ACP
Bullet : 230gr. Full Metal Jacket - Flat Point
Ballistics : 1010fps - 521 ft./lbs. - 5" bbl.
Caliber : .40 S&W
Bullet : Controlled Expansion JHP
Ballistics : 180gr. @ 1100fps / 484 ft/lbs- Glock 23 (4.0"bbl)
1060fps 435 ft/lbs from a 3.5"bbl.
1150fps 538 ft/lbs from a 4.5"bbl.
.357 Mag
Velocity: 1600fps / 4" Ruger GP-100
1425fps / 1 7/8" S&W
1750fps / 6"bbl S&W 686
Bullet: 125gr Bonded Defense JHP
Muzzle Energy: 710 ft. lbs.
Caliber : .45 Colt +P
Bullet : 300gr. Controlled Expansion JHP
Ballistics : 1325fps - 1170 ft./lbs. - 7.5" bbl.
1688fps from a 16.5" carbine
gga357
Member
Double Tap has some impressive ammo thanks for the intro to the DT site. Since I am a numbers guy it is simple to see why I like .357 more than either. For my comfort/hand size the .40 gives me more rounds at equal energy.
I prefer 45ACP. It is easier to work with when reloading. It looks better. I like the low pressure of the round.
In reality, as a defensive cartridge, both will work about the same. Equally real is me distaste for the 40 S&W which, I admit, is baseless and irrational, but which provides me much satisfaction nevertheless. Weird, I know.
In reality, as a defensive cartridge, both will work about the same. Equally real is me distaste for the 40 S&W which, I admit, is baseless and irrational, but which provides me much satisfaction nevertheless. Weird, I know.
NoAlibi
Member
Flip a coin
Having more .45 pistols in the 1911 platform than I would care to admit to, I never felt the need to buy a .40
My compact carry .45 is a S/S Detonics Mark VI, so concealment is not a problem in .45ACP. The advantage in the compact .40 is definitely capacity. There are times, even if you are an excellent shot, that capacity fills a real or perceived need. I don't judge a person's ability by the capacity of their handgun. I will admit, however, that I've noticed a fair amount of poor gun handlers have gravitated to HC. Spray and pray ya think???
A city police officer who had a Glock 27 with less than 50 rounds through it decided that he couldn't trust this gun and he offered it to me for $300 - didn't need it but...SOLD. I corrected the problem and it is totally reliable now.
The .40 is so close to the .45 in effectiveness that I'm not concerned about it and I never feel under gunned when I choose to carry it on any given occasion. Just my 4 cents about it (2 cents adjusted to the post Obama stimulus package inflation
)
Having more .45 pistols in the 1911 platform than I would care to admit to, I never felt the need to buy a .40
My compact carry .45 is a S/S Detonics Mark VI, so concealment is not a problem in .45ACP. The advantage in the compact .40 is definitely capacity. There are times, even if you are an excellent shot, that capacity fills a real or perceived need. I don't judge a person's ability by the capacity of their handgun. I will admit, however, that I've noticed a fair amount of poor gun handlers have gravitated to HC. Spray and pray ya think???
A city police officer who had a Glock 27 with less than 50 rounds through it decided that he couldn't trust this gun and he offered it to me for $300 - didn't need it but...SOLD. I corrected the problem and it is totally reliable now.
The .40 is so close to the .45 in effectiveness that I'm not concerned about it and I never feel under gunned when I choose to carry it on any given occasion. Just my 4 cents about it (2 cents adjusted to the post Obama stimulus package inflation
)
Last edited:
doctorxring
Member
That's a Win - Win choice
.
Both have proven themselves to be equivalent as fight stoppers,
along with the 357 Magnum and the 357 Sig.
Take your pick. Go with whatever gives you the most confidence
because that is what you will need when the time comes.
.
.
Both have proven themselves to be equivalent as fight stoppers,
along with the 357 Magnum and the 357 Sig.
Take your pick. Go with whatever gives you the most confidence
because that is what you will need when the time comes.
.
- Status
Similar threads
