.40 s&w

[wicked251]

Been noticing a lot of 40s offered for sale and trade lately. I dont own one but was wondering if there is a reason for this. Ammo supply doesnt seem to be an issue around here.

 

[Thermactor]

it's mainly from people who are moving to 9mm platforms because they believe that 9mm can do everything that 40 S&W can do, with less recoil and more capacity.

I think it's because of police agencies adopting a softer recoiling firearm so that their women officers could qualify, because the 40 S&W is snappier than the soft-recoiling 9mm.

 

[Hokkmike]

Maybe it is just because there are a lot of .40's out there? In any case, I see no significant indictment against the caliber or the pistols made for it, except on a model by model basis perhaps. A poor design shows up every once in a while.

 

[jmr40]

I think there has been a shift among a lot of people going back to 9mm, especially with many LE agencies. Personally I think there is a place for both rounds, but people are "FINALLY" beginning to understand that the better 9mm loads are right on the heels of most 125 gr 357 magnum loads when fired from 4" or shorter barrels. If 125 gr 357 mag is the benchmark, then the same bullet weight 50 fps slower with 3X the capacity and 1/2 the recoil is a good thing. Not to mention cost.

The better 40 S&W loads will come pretty darn close to matching 357 loads with bullet weights 150-180 gr from shorter barrels too. I still think the 40 will remain popular for those who want or need a heavier bullet. But for most people a 9mm will do everything they need a handgun to do.

 

[Cee Zee]

9mm can do everything that 40 S&W can do, with less recoil and more capacity.

I wouldn't agree with either of those conclusions. Yes you can get slightly more capacity but I have a 16+1 .40 pistol. And with most pistols recoil is in the ergonomics. I barely feel any recoil at all with my XDm. I've seen 9mm's that had more felt recoil. It's a problem for some people but it's mostly a matter of finding the right pistol IMO.

I don't see anything wrong with a 9mm BTW. I just think a .40 can do a couple of things a 9mm can't. Every little bit helps and if you deliver more power to the target your gun is going to be more effective. If that wasn't true we would all be shooting BB guns.

 

[lemaymiami]

On the street I carried both 9mm and .40cal sidearms - each has its advantages. From a purely survival point of view (during a police career I was in charge of training for a hundred man department here in south Florida in the early nineties for about three years) the collective wisdom was that we wanted whatever would toss the heaviest bullet weight downrange and in that department I'd still go with .40cal. If we could have nothing but skilled shooters on board the 45 round would be even better... That heavy, slow moving 45 is deadly efficient even in standard hardball format because you could count on it to deeply penetrate where vital systems reside in that once in a lifetime face off...

This particular topic will always provide lots of argument so I'll stand by now and listen...

 

[mgmorden]

I wouldn't agree with either of those conclusions. Yes you can get slightly more capacity but I have a 16+1 .40 pistol. And with most pistols recoil is in the ergonomics. I barely feel any recoil at all with my XDm. I've seen 9mm's that had more felt recoil. It's a problem for some people but it's mostly a matter of finding the right pistol IMO.

That's not comparing on fair grounds though. Yes, the gun you're shooting will make a difference. Most people are going to find a Kel-tec PF9 in 9mm to recoil more than a CZ-75 in .40S&W. The CZ would also have more capacity.

HOWEVER, once you find "the right gun", assuming that model is chambered in both, 9mm will always have more capacity, and it will always have less felt recoil. To claim otherwise is simply ignoring physics.

That being said, I don't think too many people are selling off .40's - there's just lots of them out there so as guns go up for sale there will be a decent number of them.

If you're talking about police trade-ins, then that's simple: cops tend to replace their guns every now and then whether they need to or not. .40 is more popular in LE, so for LE trade-ins they will be mostly in .40. The replacement guns they bought though may also be .40's. Heck they may even be the same model.

FWIW, I own guns in both rounds and shoot both. I tend to favor 9mm, but my bedside gun is in .40. Reason? It was surplus and had night sights. I didn't feel like equipping one of the 9's with night sights so the SW99 in .40 does nightstand duty.

 

[wicked251]

Never really followed the 40, in fact I shot one for the first time 2 weeks ago.
Browsing the social media gun trade and sales pages there seems to be more 40s listed than 9mm or anything else. This was surprising to me knowing the majority of pistols are either 9 or 45.
On a side note: I hate separating the 9mm from the 40 brass after collecting at the range.

 

[Ascot500]

I like the .40 for one reason....the case isn't tapered

 

[Deltaboy1984]

I went from 9mm to 40 cause I wanted 15 rounds of 357mag power in an Auto.

 

[Cee Zee]

9mm will always have more capacity

The difference is not very much and some .40's have higher capacity than so called high capacity 9mm's. Even if there are a couple more rounds it's because the .40 rounds are bigger making them more effective. And if you disagree with that you're the one who will be ignoring physics.

 

[MajorMagnetic]

Hello...I shoot the 9mm and the .40 and carry them both. I shoot the 9mm more because I reload and the 9mm is cheaper to shoot, but the .40 is my favorite. The 9mm is a speedy bullet that might go through 2 or 3 people but doesn't have a lot of knockdown power. The .40 has the speed of the 9mm and the knockdown of a .45. The .40 and .45 ballistics are identical. The .45 is just a big, heavy, slow bullet for close range only. Stand back and watch someone shoot a .45 and you can actually see the bullet. When I started shooting the .40, factory ammo was $11.95/box. Now it almost up to $20/box. I sincerely hope I never have to shoot anyone, but if I shoot them with the .40, I know they're not getting back up.

JMO..................MM

 

[Redstate]

I sold my CZ P-07 just because of caliber consolidation... Wanted to shoot more .357/.38, .45acp and .45colt, 9mm, .32acp, .22lr and .380... So something had to go... It was the .40

 

[Shield_Malfunction]

In my opinion every round has pros and cons. If there was a superior, end all performer, we wouldn't have several calibers. 9mm has a lot of fan boys, and for good reason, it's cheap, lower recoil, slightly higher capacity. 40S&W penetrates better, has a bigger hole, slightly less capacity, more recoil.

To any fanboy that says one is better then the other, is an ignorant fan boy. Both have pros and cons. I think the reason some LE agencies go with the 9mm is cost savings (or recoil factor). The order of importance is shot placement, penetration, expansion. If you cant shoot 40 accurately, but you shoot 9mm more accurately, then 9mm might be better for you. If you shoot both the same then maybe you should consider 40. Neither is a magical round, all the BS in these arguments sometimes defies physics.

Over penetration is BS. Self defense loadings are meant to penetrate and expand correctly, if you shoot ball ammo then go with a 45 auto.

The 9mm does not equal the 40. Anyone can manipulate statistics to meet their goals. Ballistic jello, one shot stops, all that other BS really comes down to what you are comfortable with and what performs adequately. I carry a 380 more often then I would like because it is better than nothing and the convenience. I would prefer to carry 357 mag 158 JHP or 40 SW 155 JHP, thats me. Others prefer 9mm, which is superior to 380 in my opinion. Again pros and cons, personal preference.

 

[Cee Zee]

I don't see a problem using any of the major caliber's as a carry pistol. They all have their good and bad points. I tend to think that more people choose a 9mm because of recoil than because of capacity. A lot of women choose a 9mm because anything bigger is pushing the envelope for them. It's certainly not true of all women. My niece liked to shoot the .44 magnum I got from my brother. That thing has some bite to it for me mainly because of the handle design IMO. But I know it has plenty of power and is likely going to cause trouble for a lot more people than a 9mm will. That's just plain ole physics and it can't be changed. I know men that don't like to shoot a .45 too. Every person has their limit although it seems some people don't care if they have a limit or not. Like these people for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnLsZgoWMJ0

 

[SDGlock23]

I think the short of it is that MOST people cannot shoot handguns well and find they shoot the 9mm easier and maybe save a few bucks on FMJ ammo. I certainly think the 9mm is a good cartridge but it's not a .40 either.

 

[ku4hx]

I like the 40 ... a lot. No particular reason other than it's another cartridge to load for, it's fun to shoot and there are some really nice guns out there for it. Of course you can say all those things about pretty much any cartridge.

If the number of 40s for private sale and trade has spiked, my first thought is too many people listened to too many fanbois and bought what they were told was the "best" gun. Only to find out later maybe they should have tried out a few before buying. At least that's the situation at my gun club for many 40s that get posted on the cork board for sale or trade.

If you are a new or inexperienced shooter, the 40 can be a rude awakening ... especially in a small lightweight gun, ergo, dump it.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

I'm kind of agnostic on the .40 cal; it's just another round to me, like the 9mm and .45 ACP. There are always tradeoffs, that's true. People will probably always debate/argue which caliber is best, but my reading of the extant research has lead me to conclude that the 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP are so close in real world performance as to make the choice just personal opinion. There does seem to be a small improvement in the number of rounds needed to stop someone as you go up the chain in size, but the numbers are only a few tenths apart. I would probably rather have 15 rounds of 9mm than 8 rounds of .45 ACP.

The .40 splits the difference. It does have more recoil and sharper recoil than the 9mm. No getting around that. It holds (generally) one less round than the same gun would in 9mm, not a huge difference...at least for full size guns. The follow up shot will almost certainly be slower than with the 9mm, Ceteris paribus.

Still, the geek in me has some fondness for the round. I like the fact that one can run bullets from 135gr to 200gr; on paper that's a possible advantage for some purposes.

The main reason I will probably always have at least one .40 is for availability of ammo. Whenever there's a scare and ammo dries up the .22LR goes first along with the 9mm, then the .38 Special and 12 ga buckshot. Occasionally even the .45 ACP is sold out. But never have I ever been unable to find .40 S&W locally.

The main concern I have is maybe unique to my situation...it's the possibility of loading the wrong ammo in my gun. I have several HKs that can all use the same magazine. No matter if I carry a P30S, USPc, VP9 or P2000 they can all use the same P30/VP9 mag. The issue is that I also have a P30L but in .40 cal. The mag is the same as the P30 but of course it has different ammo. When I do opt to carry the P30L I must be diligent about swapping the spare mag out.

 

[bannockburn]

I have had a few .40s and never found the recoil to be too snappy or difficult to control. The reason I eventually sold or traded them off was that I just didn't feel like I needed another pistol caliber to stock up on ammo for. Already have plenty of 9mm. and .45 and both of those serve me very well.

 

[Thermactor]

What's really nice about the 40 S&W is that you can convert to two other calibers with a simple barrel swap.
357 sig
9mm Luger
all it takes is a barrel. Most of the time you can even keep the 40 S&W magazine to feed 9mm rounds.
So its versatile if anything. In a SHTF situation you can carry a 40 S&W gun in your BOB with a 357 Sig barrel, a 9mm barrel, and a 22lr conversion slide and magazine kit.

 

[Cee Zee]

The .40 splits the difference. It does have more recoil and sharper recoil than the 9mm. No getting around that. It holds (generally) one less round than the same gun would in 9mm, not a huge difference...at least for full size guns. The follow up shot will almost certainly be slower than with the 9mm, Ceteris paribus.

I don't have a problem with quick follow up shots with my .40. I pretty much agree with the rest of your post but IMO it's the ergnonomics of the gun that determines how fast it can be fired. I have different .45 caliber pistols and one can be fired much faster than the other even though it weighs less. Ergonomics is certainly the deal with that pistol. And the slow shooting .45 I have is a Sig P220. It isn't exactly slow really. It's just slower than my other .45.

 

[USAF_Vet]

I don't mind the .40S&W. I do think the recoil is snappier than 9mm, but that's not off putting. I just don't have one because I'm stocked so deep in 9mm already, buying into .40 doesn't make much financial sense.

 

[Snowdog]

When an agency changes to a new generation Glock, or a different model all together, many of those pistol go to distributors such as CDNN, SOG, AIM and the like. It's generally not because the platform or cartridge failed them. It's like thinking Toyota is suspect because there are so many at a used car dealership when the truth is so many were made.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

I don't have a problem with quick follow up shots with my .40. I pretty much agree with the rest of your post but IMO it's the ergnonomics of the gun that determines how fast it can be fired. I have different .45 caliber pistols and one can be fired much faster than the other even though it weighs less. Ergonomics is certainly the deal with that pistol. And the slow shooting .45 I have is a Sig P220. It isn't exactly slow really. It's just slower than my other .45.

True, but take two identical guns, one in 9mm and one in .40 cal, and shoot them both. There's not much way to avoid the latter having a more pronounced recoil impulse. However I do agree that it's sometimes overstated. My HK USPc .40 and HK P30L .40 aren't hard to shoot at all.

 

[Fiv3r]

I rather like the .40. I do wish the ammo was a little more affordable. However, the ammo/gun panics over the last few years have taught me the value of having a back up caliber that usually remains on the shelves. The .40 never seems unavailable.