40 SW vs 45 ACP

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like my .40! 3.5" barrel and about 1.5 lbs unloaded make it great for CC.

Last week I put a magazine of 8 rounds in a 2" group at 25 yards. That works for me! (Usually I get 8 rds in a hole the size of my hand, but I'm a smaller guy so that's not to bad.)

I was under the impression that .40s had a little better penetration than a .45 but obviously narrower wound channel. Doesn't matter as long as it stops the BG and doesn't hit a friendly.

Some say the .45 has less recoil. I THINK they mean less felt recoil because it's exerted over a longer time. The .40 is kinda snappy, but you can get used to it like any other recoil. Guess it depends on what feels right. Go to a range, and rent a few styles at $4 a gun until you find a model you like.
 
Last edited:
Practical difference in shooting is nil , however if you plan on reloading them make sure you get a dial caliper to measure your reloads especialy with the 40.

With the higher working pressure of the 40 I suggest that after you reload a few you chamber them in the gun and make sure the bullets are NOT being pushed back in the case when being chambered . If they are you need to get a crimp on them or a heavier crimp .

I get more recoil with my 40 than my 45's but then again it is 10 oz's lighter than they are , nothing to worry about but it is a fact since many of the 40's are built on light weight frames .

If you want a 40 1911 go to Gunbroker and do a seach in semiauto pistols for Armscor , there is a brand new high cap 1911 in 40 there for a nice price .
 
Prefer the 45acp, but 40 is ok too....

I have both, and I do believe the 40 has a snappier recoil, but, mine is also a smaller pistol, so that might have something to do with it as well. I prefer the 1911 feel, I do love that style, but a Sig Sauer P220 is fantastic, and really reliable right out of the box. I happen to have dinky hands, so have to stick with a smaller grip type, and the 1911 fits perfectly for me. My 40 is a Sig P239, and it's great for a carry, due to its small size. All boils down to what you end up preferring, I guess. I still ended up with both!:D


P.S. The 1911 style I now have is the new Sig, and I love it!!:)
 
My 2 c

Ive owned a .45 Gov Model a .40 Glock and a my last acquisition a Taurus pt145 this is my accuracy record. I shoot worst groups with my 1911 next my .40 Glock and best with the Taurus in .45 for some reason so this has become my most carry gun. Small package that holds 11 rounds of .45 and pretty accurate. My advice test different calibers and ammo and stick with what u shoot best. Both calibers are good.
 
Tried to upload a gel comparison but got an error so here is a link to the same figure in a previous thread for anyone who wants to see the nondifferences in .40 and .45 in terms of ballistics:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=227653

Anyway I shoot a .40 and like it for the cheaper ammo, lighter weight (G22), and higher capacity. That said, I will be looking for a .45 sometime down the road but I still really like the way the .40 shoots and carries.

Incidentily, someone on this board has a signature renaming the various calibers and one was changing the .40 to 10mm Retarded. Just makes me laugh.:D

-Sefus
 
40S&W vs 45 ACP

I own both and agree with much of what has been said in previous posts. I don't find any noticable difference in recoil between the two. Accuracy is very close for me with both rounds. Cost is VERY close to identical here in Massachusetts. Having said that, I shoot the 45 in practical shoots primarily because the 45 will knock down the poppers better than the 40. I carry both but the 40 does have a greater capacity. So what should you get? As previously mentioned, try shooting both then make a decision. You can't go wrong with either round in my opinion.

Boomer1911A1: I had a very early sigma in 40 and I couldn't get more than a couple rounds into a plate sized target at 10 to 15 rounds. Brought it back to Smith and they went through the gun replacing the barrel and a "few" other parts. Back then they even let me into the factory to test fire the gun when repaired. Now that gun will print under 2" at 25 yards with my old eyes. Seems in their rush to get the clone out, quality control was not a priority. They did, however, correct the problem for me at least.
 
The Great Debate

I own pistols in 9mm and 45 ACP.

I carried a 1911 .45 for about 17 years. Rotating between a full frame, officer's and compact from time to time.

About 2 years ago I started carrying a Glock 21. I love it.
Truly, a masterwork weapon. Although I have considered moving to a .40 Glock 23, it's probably not going to happen... I'm in love with the 21.

I let the wife carry the 9mm Glock 17, man she's deadly... a much better shot than me, LOL.
 
The biggest complaint I see about the .40 concerns its "snappy" recoil, but this varies a lot between gun brands. The Glock .40s seem to get the most complaints, with the G23 described as being harder to control than the G22. On the other hand, Beretta .40s are often said to be soft shooting.

Also, the recoil of the .40 varies substantially between bullet weights. Loads with 180 grain bullets are usually not as hot as loads with lighter bullets, and are therefore easier to control.
 
Where is everyone buying their ammo? Wal-mart sales 45auto Blazer Brass 230gr a box of 50 for only $9.95 that's only 20 cents a round. When 40 cal. first came out it was my pick, cause I got a 40cal round (wishing for a 45) with the capacity of a 9mm. So I had the best of both worlds. Keep in mind that was for duty. So IMO that was the only advantage the 40 had over the 45 (for duty) That's no so with today's weapon's. For a person that's not in law enforcement he does'nt need a high cap gun. Most people will never fire their weapon in defence, and if God forbid you do when was the last time you heard of a person being killed after he ran out of bullets. Now that I have ranted on bottom line is I would take the 45 over the 40. I know shot placement is everything, but with a 45 you will stop him just about anywhere you hit him.
 
As far as the .40 holding more rounds, that is totally dependent on the firearm not the cartridge itself. The Taurus PT145 holds 10+1 of .45 while the PT140 also holds 10+1 of .40.
I much prefer the .45 due to felt recoil. As soon as I find someone who wants a .40 instead of their .45 I am going to trade them my PT140MilPro.
 
I finally phased out all of my 40's. I swear the round is inherently not as accurate as 9mm or 45acp regardless of platform. Don't like the snappy recoil either, IMO the 45 has less recoil, more of a push than a snappy, torquing twist.
Anyone else here feel the 40 is consistently less accurate than the 9mm or 45acp in similar weapons?
 
45 vs 40... Aaha

If you handload, a lot of reported KA-BOOMS have happened to .40 caliber weaponary [Glocks, In Particular], due to their unsupported chambers
Click to expand...

I think that the KB's were more due to the fact that the 40 is already loaded close max pressure and a small error in powder can have a big effect on pressure curves.

To those who say that there are no practical differences… Well you could not be more wrong. I am not speaking in terms of terminal performance, because both are very good performers with modern ammo. The real difference is in the cartridges them selves. The 45 is loaded to a much lower pressure, and that pressure acting on a larger surface (I know, its not that much larger, only .0348 square inches) provides a much smoother recoil pulse, resulting in better controllability and faster follow up shots. The lower operating pressure of a 45 will also result in less leading and fouling in your barrel. Furthermore, the lower pressure will make you gun last longer.
 
My XD 45 is:
lightweight
has managable recoil
holds 13+1 rounds of .45ACP
fits my hand well
shoots well (for me)
is a tad chubby
has a two passive safties
and is very reliable

My CZ75B in .40 S&W is
heavy
has manageable recoil (likely because it's heavy)
holds 12+1 rounds of .40 S&W
fits my hand well
shoots almost as well for me (slightly sloppy trigger)
is slim
has one active saftey
and is very reliable

With the right holster, I prefer to carry and shoot my XD, but as you can see it's not because its in .45 or not. It's because the gun suits me just a hair better. I carry them both because right now I dont have a great holster for the XD.

My point is if you love to shoot the the Steyr M40 (in .40) and sort of like the taurus 1911, don't buy the 1911 just because it is in .45.

A friend of mine whom I just paid for her carry permit went shopping for her first carry piece, and was looking at the Taurus Millenium Pro series of autoloaders. She felt them all and decided that the PT111 fit her hand best and pointed the most naturally, and didnt "know why else" but there was another reason she liked it, while I much preferred the PT145 10rd capacity. it fit me better, and I know I can shoot .45 much more readily than I can 9mm.

If you were handed two guns that had all the exact same sizes and specs and etc etc, and the ONLY difference was caliber, then I would probably vote for .45, as would most people. But the truth is that you need to stick with what feels right in YOUR hand.
 
If the platform fits your hand and is of good or better quality, you won't be underarmed with any 9mm, .40S&W, or .45ACP. The 9mm and .45ACP do indeed have longer track records, but .40 apparently does its job well enough.

I'd even say the particular load used matters more than the caliber.

So any handgun in one of those three is going to do the job, with the right ammunition, and as long as the shooter does their job.
 
As far as practical differences in effectiveness or "stopping power" I'm sure they are minimal. As far as shootability goes I prefer the .45 ACP or 9mm in defensive semi-autos. I've owned one .40 and shot a couple of others and the recoil was much snappier (as others here have mentioned). Just my .02 YMMV.
 
fellow redneck I find myself agreeing with ya on this one my biggest problem is the whole 40 is a compramise between 45 better stoping, less capacity (shoot BG once) and 9mm ok stopping but great capacity, very controlable (doubletap the BG)
If you can explain how to shoot the BG 1 1/2 times I might better understand the need for a fo-tay.
 
In shorter barrels the .40 caliber seems to be a better round (on paper) than the .45 due to its higher velocity. You can get energy equal to or great than 400 ft-lbs in as short as a 3 inch barrel with a .40, but its a bit more difficult to do so with a .45 (though i imagine doubletap would solve the problem nicely). That being said it seems that a lot more people respond negatively to the recoil of a .40 than a .45, and as already mentioned shot placement is infinitely more important than caliber (well not infinitely, but a lot at least). If your going with a 1911 by all means get it in .45 at the very least so that you'll prevent legions of people from spitting out their coffee in response to such blasphemy:) But you really owe it to yourself to try both before you end up choosing what you want to own.
 
(on paper)+1
because in real life heavy bullets tend to loose less velocity.and bullet tech has them expanding at any velocity the manufacturer wants
45 cal 230 golddots ar designed to expand reliably at less than 800 fps and as you said doubletaps 230 GD chronoed 875 fps from my ported 3" amt backup
 
I almost bought a 40, but then I shot my friend's 45acp and I liked the recoil much better. True, it's a slower round, but does it really matter? The size of the hole is what matters to me :D. The .40 recoil seemed really whippy to me, whereas the 45acp was a soft push.

As for affordable ammo - I can find 45acp for $11/box per 50 and .40 at around $9/box for 50. To me $2 isn't that big of a difference.

My PT145 holds 10+1 - my dad's Glock in 40 (compact, not sure the model) holds 9+1. Mine is a bit heavier, but I'm 6'4, 260 and my dad is 5'10 and about 150-160. So for me, I can take the heavier - he may not like it on his hip.

Go out and shoot a 45acp and a .40 and see which one you do better with and then make your decision from there.

Good luck!!!
 
fellow redneck I find myself agreeing with ya on this one my biggest problem is the whole 40 is a compramise between 45 better stoping, less capacity (shoot BG once) and 9mm ok stopping but great capacity, very controlable (doubletap the BG)
If you can explain how to shoot the BG 1 1/2 times I might better understand the need for a fo-tay.
Click to expand...

Borrowed from another poster in another thread
rangercomparison.jpg

I'm just not seeing any compromise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Whats the difference between 10mm and a 40
Replies
16
Views
1K
fxstchewy
F
N
  • Locked
recoil and muzzle flip on a 45 ACP
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Dean Williams
D
TTv2
  • Locked
.40/10mm vs .45 ACP/.45 Super
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
Outlaw75
Outlaw75
D
  • Locked
  • Poll
Which would be the better handgun for the military?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
kmrcstintn
K
P
  • Locked
Perceived recoil of polymer vs. steel pistols
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
JONWILL
JONWILL
Back
Top