BeerSleeper
Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 688
RobMoore said:I think we need a minimum post count required to use "vs" when starting a new thread.
I like that. How about 10,000 posts?
RobMoore said:I think we need a minimum post count required to use "vs" when starting a new thread.
the only real advantage he could see was that for some people feel that they must get a .40 caliber pistol but don't want the recoil of a .45ACP
The same people will tell you to load your 9mm in +p or +p+ to ensure stopping power,
If an intruder breaks into my house,before i shoot him dead ill be sure to apologize to him first for using a "marginal" defensive round with my glock 17.I also dont see most police or FBI using the .357 or 45cal either...doesnt mean it cant get the job done.Note that most law enforcement depts have ababdoned th 9mm (including the FBI). The 9mm is marginal as a defensive round. .40 165gr or 180gr vs 9mm 115gr is sort of obvious.
Now, I am not bashing the 9mm, but I would only go with it in a very small platform gun, or if I were comfortable with its ability to stop an assailant WITHOUT having to move to exotic high pressure loads. If meet one or both of those criteria, go for the 9mm, otherwise, go bigger.
Refer to my above post.This has certainly received a lot of comment. I should clarify my statement about the 355 ft lb energy level of 9mm. That was for normal pressure ammo. You can get more energy out of a 9mm round but only if you accept the additional stress on your gun of +P and +P+ loads. You still get a small bullet. I bought a 40 and am happy with it. I don't need to over-stress my gun to get energies of 445 and higher. I just need to choose my defense ammo. This is generally higher than 45ACP as well as higher than 9mm. If I want higher energy, but will accept a smaller bullet, I can buy a .357 Sig barrel and shoot that caliber with energies in the upper 500's and lower 600's. I may try that just for the fun of it.
If I want more energy, I will get a .357 magnum revolver or a .41 magnum revolver. I won't bother with a .45. But I have always admired the mechanics of a well-made 1911. I may get one of those someday if a pile of money falls on me - for the gun, not the caliber.
I think I'm starting to like some of these "vs." threads as guys pull out some of the greatest BS ever trying to defend stuff or try and win them, and the "9 vs. .40" is a classic.
I'd like to interject some actual facts before I weigh in and share my take as the discussion is already pretty murky with all the BS being thrown around...
First, no agency ever wanted the .40, that's a fact.
no it's not even close to a fact.
After several high profile shoot-outs in the late 80's and into the early 90's that had resulted in LEO deaths from facing better armed perps had made the news, when agencies started looking for better and improved ammo choices for the ubiquitous wonder 9's that had become the LE standard (mostly Glock 17's and 19's and Beretta 92's replacing lots of S&W revolvers), S&W wisely generated attention and created a buzz for themselves by talking up the virtues of the mighty 10mm and introduced some models squarely with the intent of snatching back some of their lost market share. The 10mm was and is a force to be reckoned with, even the best +P 9mm is just no match for it and it ended any argument, not many "9mm vs. 10mm" threads that's for sure... Anyways, while S&W had the spotlight and had made significant inroads towards convincing LEA's that there G17's & G19's and 92's were now children's toys and utterly inferior, they had a big problem... The 10mm was too powerful for majority of officers to handle,
Not even close to reality. The FBI was looking for a new round because of a paritcular shootout. They never even tested full power 10mm. They tested 10mm lite as loaded by a member of the test team. The round they adopted was the 10mm lite. Other agencies follow because the FBI must be correct.
it was also breaking the models they had designed and was going to be expensive, not just in ammo cost, but also new leather and such for the agencies to "upgrade". So, someone at S&W got the great idea to cut the 10mm down to be less powerful and geniusly rename it the .40S&W cartridge,
The FBI is the one that came up with the idea to download the 10mm. At least you got this part sort of correct. S&W realized that the FBI lite 10mm could be loaded in a shorter cartridge that would fit in 9mm size guns. The problem with the 10mm S&W was not recoil, it was size and weight.
sure it wasn't really much better than 9mm at all, but they'd just spent a significant amount of time and money convincing the market that 9mm sucked, which turned out was nearly the same thing as convincing the market that the .40 was at the very least"better than crappy 9mm". They were on to something. Now, the important thing to remember is that S&W did not make the .40 a success, Glock did platforms, goodbye 9mm, hello .40. That's what happend, that's how it happend.
Neither company is responsable for the success of the .40, It was created for the FBI, adopted by the FBI and the FBI is responsable for it's success. Many agencies simply follow the FBI.
IMO 9mm is still better, all other things mentioned already aside, I have yet to see almost anyone shoot a .40 better than a 9, even .45acp is easier to handle, what .40 may add in performance is wiped away by it's higher degree of difficulty for officers to use it effectively.
I wouldn't be surprised to see some LEA's make the switch back to 9mm as more and more emphasis returns to training over a certain caliber's mythical powers over another, it's cheaper and does tge job just as good, in fact since it allows LEO's to shoot better, it's actually better.
Actually your partly right...the problem was recoil.One source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10mm_Auto ,more sources upon request.This post is just filled with fail.
The rest is just your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. It doesn't change the fact that the best .40 loads outperform the best 9mm loads in the FBI test protocols
Even at height of ammo shortage Walmart shelf was full of .40s&w stuff. Under such circumstances you're choosing between real pistol and pistol that can be used as hammer or paper weight. Hope that helps make you decide.I don't own an auto.
Why would I buy a 40 cal instead of a 9mm?
The only reason I can see at this moment is that I'd have more choices when ammo becomes harder to come buy (have 9mm currently)?
The next Q will obviously be, "which model to buy?"