9mm Vs. .40 S&W?

[Jailer]

Is there anything inherently wrong or lacking about the .40 S&W chambering? Recently I was informed that the .40 S&W was not a "classic" cartridge and that the 9mm cartridge was. It was also recommended, by more than one source, to stay away from the .40 S&W. I intend to get a CZ-75 SP-01 Tactical in .40 S&W. I prefer the .40 for knockdown power and lethality as opposed to the European .38, the 9mm. Where did I go wrong???

 

[Plan2Live]

If you are happy with that choice then no you didn't go wrong. Is there anything inherently wrong with that cartridge? No. Is it superior to 9mm? No. I'm sure someone will post a reply calling it a Short and Weak version of the 10mm cartridge but they won't stand in front of you and let you shoot them. .40 caliber has a reputation for producing more muzzle flip than 9mm but that has a lot to do with the individual gun as well. So again, if you like it go for it.

 

[TestPilot]

Nothing wrong with the ammo itself. If some manufacturers make crappy guns that cannot properly handle a 40S&W when they advertised it as a 40S&W gun, it is the gun manufacturer's fault.

40S&W does have more power, but I would not call it a "knockdown" power.

Whether if some ignorant thinks it is "classic" or not is not of my interest.

But, I would warn you against getting a 40S&W pistol before you know you can actually handle it. Many ranges rent 40S&W pistols.

 

[wow6599]

I'm sure someone will post a reply calling it a Short and Weak version of the 10mm cartridge but they won't stand in front of you and let you shoot them.

Well, in all fairness, it is a shortened 10mm case......and it is weaker.

And for the record, I wouldn't stand in front of someone shooting a Red Ryder bb gun......those things hurt!

IMHO, 9 and 45 make the .40 irrelevant.......unless it's a .40 10x25

 

[Jailer]

I also shoot the Glock 20 in 10mm Auto, so recoil is not a factor. My wife shoots the Glock 27 in .40S&W. (When firing, it comes up on her quite a bit.) I was taken back that, as explained to me, the .40 S&W is not a "classic" chambering and the 9mm is. My history of the 9mm goes back to WW1 as the 9mm Parabellum. I never thought a pistol chambering could have a "pedigree". My loss...and I guess I'm willing to pay the price for the .40S&W. I understand that the .40S&W is a shortened 10mm Auto but if it's good enough for most of our police officers in the U.S., then it's good enough for me.
That said, is the .40S&W a good chambering for the CZ-75 SP-01 Tactical? Any excessive wear or short life due to the increased recoil? Is the recoil manageable for quick followup shots?

 

[Zerodefect]

I had 9mm Glocks and .40 Glocks. I sold the 9mm's.

The 9mm's weren't any easier for me,in fact in lighter polymer pistols, I felt that 9mm was as jumpy as .40. So I kept the more powerful Glocks. I try to shoot as powerful of a round as possible. If it slows me down, then I'll drop down a caliber. I have nothing to gain by dropping down to a weaker round.

Some .40 defensive ammo has better ballistics than my .45's. 9mm is in style right now. Mostly because it's easier to shoot. Why do I shoot a .40? Because .45 doesn't fit in a mid sized Glock 19/23 frame, that's why. Except for .45GAP, which I'd love to have, if that ammo wasn't priced like a Lockheed Martin product. The Glock 21, in .45 is a fat girl, no way I'm going to carry that.

You have to weigh for yourself, is the softer shooting gun so much better that it's worth the loss of power? For me it wasn't. I shoot .40 fine.

CZ 75 SA (single action) is the best CZ:

 

[wow6599]

if it's good enough for most of our police officers in the U.S., then it's good enough for me.

I could be wrong on this, but I think a lot of departments across the country have been moving back to 9s and 45s. I don't have a link to anything (anyone?) to back this up, but it seems to be the trend - at least in my head.

 

[TestPilot]

That said, is the .40S&W a good chambering for the CZ-75 SP-01 Tactical? Any excessive wear or short life due to the increased recoil? Is the recoil manageable for quick followup shots?

Sorry, I've shot many 40S&W pistols, but only way for you to know the answer to that is to shoot the SP-01 yourself.

How excessive or mild it feels to me has no meaning to you.

I would not expect a 40S&W P226 to last as long as 9mm P226. Same goes for Glock 22 vs. Glock 17. So, I would not expect a 40S&W SP-01 to last as long as a 9mm SP-01.

But, that is not the point. I use an M&P40 which I do not expect to last as long as an M&P9, but I still use it because I do expect it to last long enough for my purpose.

The question is whether if it lasts long enough for you, not how longer it lasts compared to other calibers. A 22LR rifle barrel will last a lot longer than an 5.56mm AR-15 barrel, but you would not want to use 22LR for home defense instead of 5.56mm for that reason, right?

 

[Panzerschwein]

Nothing wrong with a good .40 if you can control the recoil.

Today, 9mm is virtually as effective with good hollow points yet has less recoil. Round like the Speer Gold Dot and Federal HST are great choices in either caliber, and to tell you the truth .40 S&W really doesn't have much of a stopping power advantage over the 9mm.

If you want REAL stopping power, something like a full power .357 magnum would be great but you can't stuff that round in a double stack autoloader very well, hence .357 SIG but .357 SIG still is not quite as effective as .357 magnum.

 

[Zerodefect]

Another single action CZ pic:

 

[TomJ]

You didn't go wrong. I'm not sure what being a "classic" has to do with the effectiveness of a round. Firearms and ammunition have progressed and will continue to do so, as you don't see anyone using a musket as a SD gun (I hope). All the evidence I've seen points to 9mm, .40 and .45 all being effective SD rounds. I think the specific ammunition you're using is more important than the choice of caliber among these 3, as all manufacturers do not make equally effective SD ammunition. Some expand and penetrate more consistently than others.

I carry all 3, and am equally confident in them. There are differences in the recoil and accuracy, and the gun has as much to do with that as the ammunition. By way of example, I have a 27 and XD40SC, and both are excellent guns. My 27 has much less felt recoil then my XD40SC (to me), and I shoot the 27 more accurately, so it's one of the guns I carry. The XD is not. If you're happy with the CZ, which is a great gun, and you shoot it well, you made the right choice.

 

[Highcaliber]

Intermediate barrier makes a difference in the .40 vs 9mm debate.

...the 40 S&W really doesn't have much of a stopping power advantage over the 9mm.

Not exactly true.

The .40 S&W does make a difference IF you want to have adequate penetration AFTER passing through an intermediate barrier, such as sheet metal car doors, windshields, plywood, etc. THIS is where the .40 S&W surpasses the 9mm.

.40 Sheet metal & Windshields

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Where did I go wrong???

You didn't. It is a good choice if you like the cartridge.

The high pressure nature of the .40 S&W combined with my choice of a gun that was smaller and lighter than it should have been for the cartridge left me unhappy with the cartridge. I switched to .45 and have been happy ever since. I'm also getting into 9mm soon.

It's a matter of preference. If you like the 40, then be happy. Personally, I think you made a great choice.

 

[JR47]

Classic cartridges tend to be the first of a line. Or simply OLD. The .40 S&W isn't that old.

Police Departments still tend to be issuing the .40 S&W around here. Mostly in Glock 22 pistols.

Try to shoot the gun before purchasing it, to see is it feels good, and the controls are easily manipulated in your hands.

To the comment of stopping power, NO pistol has a surplus of "stopping power". Larger calibers tend to make bigger holes, and more power can be useful, as mentioned, if the Bad Guy isn't going to stand on his hind legs and let you blaze away at him in the open.

 

[ATLDave]

Why do you care if a cartridge is "classic" or not?

 

[Blue Brick]

I switched to .45 and have been happy ever since.

^^^^^^^^^^^ +1

 

[jhb]

22lr, .22mag, .32acp, .380acp, .38 special, 7.62x25, 9mmx18, 9mmx19, .38 super, .357mag, .357sig, .40s&w, .45acp, 10mm and i may have forgotten one or two more...... i shoot all of those in handguns....

all have their uses...if i had to pick one i'd likely go .45acp or 10mm on the bigger side......or maybe 9mm on the smaller side. .40S&w is a fine cartridge. i consider it between 9mm and .45acp. with the right loads 9mm and .45acp can do more than .40s&w or at the minimum keep up...but that is splitting hairs in real world speak not talking about charts and data that doesn't mean too much more in the real world. so it's not a bad choice.....not the choice i'd make but i'm me and you are you.

good news is it's easy to convert to a .357 sig if you want, with a simple barrel change on some firearms......

said simply 9mm, .40s&w or .45acp hard to go wrong with any of those three......

having said all that rambling i'm carrying a .40s&w weapon today, so...........

 

[JO JO]

I like the 40 shoot / have a G23 and G22 and I reload the 40 too
its a good round and very popular as well it will be around a long
time to come shoot what you like and what works for you the 9vs40
vs45 who cares its what you like

 

[Plan2Live]

Well, I told you it wouldn't take long.

Another factor no one has brought up yet is that during the Sandy Hook ammo shortage, 40 was easier to find than 9mm.

And yet another factor to consider is you can buy a conversion barrel for a .40 caliber pistol and convert it to a 9mm. One gun, two calibers. Just a thought.

 

[Grumulkin]

The 40 S&W hasn't been out long enough to be called a classic cartridge but I'm confident it eventually will be.

I was talking to my FFL dealer/LEO just the other day. He said some PDs are going back to the 9mm Parabellum mainly because some officers (read women) have trouble handling the 40 S&W. I suspect there will be departments using both for a long time.

I have a friend who was in the military during the Manual Noriega scrimmage in Panama. He stopped taking things quite so casually when the bullet out of his 9mm to the throat of an attacker failed to stop the attack.

I think the 40 S&W is clearly the better self defense cartridge and maybe the 45 ACP cartridge is even better but things like the 380 Auto and 9mm still have their place.

Yes, and in the wake of Sandy Hook I was able to find dies and even bullets and brass in abundance for the 40 S&W unlike the 9mm Luger.

 

[Mike J]

If you have a rental range near you it might be worth it to rent the gun you are interested in in 9mm & .40. If you can control the .40 & shoot it well & it is what you want get it. I own 2 service sized .40's, a 9mm subcompact & a .45 acp 1911. I don't think I would care for .40 in a very small & light pistol but there is nothing wrong with the round. Which round is more classic really doesn't matter.

 

[Plan2Live]

I have a friend who was in the military during the Manual Noriega scrimmage in Panama. He stopped taking things quite so casually when the bullet out of his 9mm to the throat of an attacker failed to stop the attack.

Oh boy, here we go again.

I have a friend who is an attorney and he defended a drug dealer who dropped another bad guy during an armed robbery with one shot from a Lorcin firing .25acp. My ex was a Court Reporter and she had three cases involving death by firearm, two were .22 long rifle fired from NAA revolvers the other was a .32 out of some old revolver.

I have another friend who is a Forensic Specialist in our State level law enforcement agency and he has seen plenty of one shot one kill victims hit with 9mm.

Another friend's sister took a .45acp round point blank to the face and survived with very little visible scaring. The trajectory took the .45 down her throat and out the side of her neck so you could say she was shot in the throat with a .45 and survived because it missed everything vital too. Everyone can cite a story that supports their opinion in the great caliber debate. In the end it comes down to shot placement and whether or not it's the other guy's day to die.

And by the way, there is a huge difference in the way modern hollow point ammo reacts inside the body vs the way military ball or full metal jacket ammo reacts. Apples and oranges.

 

[mongoslow]

pick a caliber and master it, then pick another and so on... people say the .40 kicks I say want to shoot one of my magnums? some say they shoot the 9 faster, yeah so do I by a few 10th/s of a second whoopy, some claim the 9mm +P+ hits with as much KE as the .40, it does as long as the .40 in question is one of the 180 grain loads but its not in the ball park when you start shooting the 155 and 165 grainers and if you want KE in the .357 Sig/mag range load some hot 135/140 grian rounds from BB,DT, or Underwood. Oh yeah recoil on those +p and +p+ 9's get you right up there with the 180 .40.
Like I said to begin with, choose your weapon, choose your caliber, then spend way more on ammo than you did on the gun and master your weapon

 

[Tomac]

All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers" regardless of caliber or bullet used. Shot placement and sufficient penetration are paramount, all else is secondary. Barring a hit to the CNS, the only way to stop an aggressive and determined BG is shutting down the brain from oxygen deprivation due to bleedout. However, even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10+ seconds of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to plant daisies in your hair.
I expect all handguns to underperform, some underperform worse than others.

With that being said, the only practical reason to choose .40 over 9mm is if you shoot it faster and more accurately. If not, you're sacrificing capacity & controllability for no provable significant advantage.
Tomac

 

[short barrel]

The .40 is the most popular law enforcement pistol cartridge. There's got to be a reason for that; however, the .40 develops too much pressure for my taste. That is because the .40 is in fact the "short and weak 10mm," which is a phrase despised by .40 enthusiast. The snappy recoil is not friendly when compared to a nine. Recoil is not a method to determine performance. The .40 is not more capable than the 9mm. It is actually less capable when all factors are considered. With today's ammo selection, not even the .45acp outshines the 9mm in terms of what you have called stopping power. Penetration and expansion into whatever you chose to shoot at is sufficient with either round. However, with the .40, you are going to be slower, have less rounds, and pay more for ammo. If you haven't figured it out, I'm not a fan of the .40. The .40 exists because the average cop couldn't handle the full house 10mm, and the subsonic 10mm would not cycle pistols reliably. I would choose a 9 over a 40 even if the capacity was the same. I would chose a 9 over a 40 even if the cost was the same. Less snappy recoil means life or death sometimes. Self defense is not a thing to be trifled with--it's not a term to be placed below what the public deems to be macho. Macho means absolutely nothing when that second, third or tenth shot needs to be fired accurately and immediately. The .40 is not superior to a nine in stopping any threat. The .40 has about the same snap as a .357Sig, which has fallen out of favor because it's not much more than a nine. My tests have revealed that a 125 grain .357Sig is identical in performance to a 124 grain +P 9mm.

Okay, wait. Most of that is just my opinion and I'm no one at all to take advice from. Don't spend your money based on what I think. If you have an opportunity, shoot both the 9 and the 40 before deciding, but know that you gain nothing in "stopping power" with a .40 over a 9. Your shooting experience of both cartridges will at least show you how quickly you can get your sights back on target with a nine.