An argument for .40 caliber

[vba]

Wildehond, fascinating read. I do find it interesting that:

"1. .... The criminals carry AK47's and normally work in packs."

So, the criminals obviously don't have to go thru all the red tape that an honest citizen does. This will always be the problem and the same is true in the USA.

 

[wildehond]

Wildehond, fascinating read. I do find it interesting that:

"1. .... The criminals carry AK47's and normally work in packs."

So, the criminals obviously don't have to go thru all the red tape that an honest citizen does. This will always be the problem and the same is true in the USA.

It is in a big part of because of the unstable countries up north. There is a great number of illegal immigrants from the Sub Saharan countries and many of them come from countries where there is NO firearms control. So they smuggle the guns in when they cross the border. There is also quite a number of guns still in caches that was smuggled into the country in the Freedom struggle from years ago. The police have cracked down quite a bit on these illegal guns, but there is still quite a number around.

Some of the police and army R5 rifles have also found their way into the criminal's hands.

The one thing you have to remember that many of these people have killed before and they have no problem doing it again. Seeing a dead body is nothing strange to them.

 

[Skribs]

Actually it makes sense. If you would have to go through a six month hassle just to get a handgun, might as well illegally get an assault rifle now. 1) you'll be armed 6 months faster and 2) a full-auto rifle is much better than a semi-auto pistol.

 

[wildehond]

Thread tangent alert!

Apologies for the tangent that this thread is going into.

Actually it makes sense. If you would have to go through a six month hassle just to get a handgun, might as well illegally get an assault rifle now. 1) you'll be armed 6 months faster and 2) a full-auto rifle is much better than a semi-auto pistol.

Illegal possetion of a firearm here is a very serious offence. You will do a long stint in a maximum security prison. You do not want to spend ANY time in a South African jail.

You are also ONLY allowed to defend your own or someone else's life and not property. I know it is insane, but this the world we live in. If someone breaks into your house at night all you can do is call the police. You can only defened your life of that of a someone in the house IF the intruder is attacking and there is not other way to stop, or get away from the attack. Yes the intruder can walk off with your stereo under his arm and there is nothing you can do about it... Like I said CRAZY!

 

[AABEN]

OK...you've presented your arguments for the 40...now present the arguments against or for the 9mm. After all, when you make a decision, do you simply look at the points that justify that which you already believe, or do you weigh the pros / cons?

Lemme help you with a few:
1. You mistakenly assume everyone is carrying +P. There is a letter floating around from a Winchester ballistics engineer that says they recommend their 9mm 147 gr. 'normal' loads in short barreled guns - longer dwell time in the barrel means a more complete powder burn before the bullet exits the barrel.
2. I always weigh caliber vs. round count when deciding. When I purchased my old (pre-Melonite) XDSC40, their XDSC9 held only 10 rounds, the 40 held 9 - I figured I'd take 9 rounds of 40 over 10 rounds of 9mm. When they redesigned the 9mm magazines to hold 13 rounds, the scales tilted towards the 9mm - I'll take 13 rounds of 9mm over 9 rounds of 40.
3. Folks are always behind the curve - BG tactics have been changing / evolving over the years - there now seems to be more cases of multiple attackers than in the past. Because of this, round count now weighs more heavily in my decision than in the past.

No caliber war here - I own both, but I recommend to most folks approaching me asking 'bout upgrading their SD guns, or buying their first gun that they start with the 9mm.

Over the years I've tended to move down in caliber as SD ammo has improved. I've gone from a 45 to a 40 to mostly 9mm for my carry guns these days.

Why has no one said any thing about the 357 Sig ?

 

[Skribs]

Wilde, if you're a gangster, I'm pretty sure possession charges aren't a big concern. I was merely playing devil's advocate.

Why has no one said any thing about the 357 Sig ?

Because most caliber wars are about caliber vs. capacity/controlability. The .357 Sig is nice if you need the extra penetration over 9mm, but it isn't going to cause a wider permanent wound tract. So for barrier penetration or armor piercing, I'd go for .357 sig over any of the standard service calibers (9/40/45) but for a "caliber war" it gives up capacity and controlability over the 9 without making a wider hole.

 

[Prosser]

wildehond:

Thank you for a great post on the .40. As you have legal issues, so do I.
In my area of Kali, we can't get permits to carry legally, unless you are retired LEO, politically connected, etc.
Legal automatics are limited to 10 rounds. This takes away one of the .40's big advantages.

I agree with your comments of one gun. I take that to one gun type. I've used 1911's so that's what I stay with. I'm looking at a 9mm 1911, but not so easy to find. I do carry a Kahr PM9 and 360 PD sometimes. That's 9mm and .357.

The only Glock I've ever enjoyed shooting, and shot well was a Glock 35, setup for IPSC.

Your comments about the stolen gun, and getting ammunition for the .40 are excellent, and the 180 grain bullet is an excellent choice.

Thank you for the explanation of permits in SA. My friends also took 9.3 X 74's in Merkel doubles to SA.

http://www.merkel-usa.com/products/rifles/side-by-side-rifle/141

"The particularly narrow receiver and the short barrels make this gun one of the lightest side-by-side rifles in the world."

Merkel doubles. They weigh about 6-7 pounds, and feel like a .22lr, but kill like a 375 H&H. I have a 375 H&H. It's around 10 pounds. Wouldn't want to lug that all over the place.

They used 320 grain bullets, heavy and rather slow for caliber, but, with good shot placement, and they can shoot, the guns worked on everything they shot with them, including cape buffalo.


Is it possible to swap barrel and magazines from the Glock .40 and turn it into a 9MM? I don't keep up on what caliber conversions are easy to do, or not in Glocks.

"TIK"??? What is that?

We have an invasion from Mexico. The Mexican gangs have crossed the borders, and are doing massive business here. They also carry AK-47's.
It seems odd, but our media seems to minimize the danger here.

For your situation it does sound like a 10MM would be nice to have.
I'd be looking at .45 Super level loads, in .45 ACP brass.

I would certainly feel better in SA with 255 grain LFN style bullets at around 1000 fps then any hollow point commercially made.

Thank you for a great post.

The .357 Sig was designed to emulate the 125 grain HP in .357 magnum
that was built up to be THE SD round, with one shot stops that exceeded about 5 .308 rifle rounds, and the .44 Magnum, at least according to one 'statistical' analysis.

The .40 will put a 135 grain bullet out at 1434 fps, exceeding the .357 Sig
in diameter, and 10 extra grains of bullet weight.
Unless armour is an issue, why give up the bigger hole, and better ballistics for a bottleneck cartridge?

One advantage is the .357 Sig will shot 90 grain bullets, at very high speed, 1634 fps. That's something you can't do in a .40, to my knowledge.

 

[wildehond]

Thread tangent alert!

Prosser

TIK is cheap Methamphetamine that is affecting many people from all walks of life. Form the richest to the poorest. TIK info Really nasty stuff.

I have done quite a bit of reading on the 357 SIG and that is was aimed, as you said, at the people looking for 357mag performance in a semi auto. The muzzle blast and low light flash is my main concern here.

I carried a Series 70 Colt 1911 for many years, but I wanted something with few more rounds in the magazine. Still love the platform.

The problem with barrel swaps in SA is that you need to apply for a whole new license for a new barrel and have to be able to prove that 'need' it.

The 9.3mm cartriges are quite popular around here. What makes the 357H&H such a good choice is the fact that a selection of ammo is available almost anywhere.

My personal preference in a big calibre rifle is the 416 Rigby. A double would be nice, but a bit out of my price range.

 

[Prosser]

Thread slide ahead

Wildehond:

Thank you for a look at the current SA. It's an area of fascination for me, and has been for a long time.

I'm not really sold on the .357, even though I have one. I want more penetration then the 125 grain bullet gives, and more bullet weight, and diameter. Using .45 Super in a 1911 I can get a 185 grain bullet going 1300-1350 fps. Close enough for government work, velocity wise.

I wish a 1911 would be made, industry standard, with a 13-14 round magazine capacity and standard frame. Glocks 30 comes close, but I don't really like Glocks, except for the 34 and 35, and don't see much reason to put up with the trigger. Also too familiar with the 1911 to switch, and I'm old.

The Merkels are cheap for doubles. 6-7 thousand here. I enjoyed shooting it, and could see carrying one around, easily, for a long time.

My 375 H&H is a CZ, and it's sort of a waste. It does carry 5 down one up.
375 H&H WAS half the price of any of the larger calibers, but, I haven't found any great deals on it in a long time, and the 30 bucks for 20 rounds
appears to be a thing of the past.
That said, I have thought about converting it to .458 Lott.
The ammo is around, the 458 Win mag can be shot in the same gun, and both kick hard, but not enough to take me off minute of elephant.

The .416 is a giant case, the ammo is too darn expensive, but, it's a great middle ground. 400 grains at 2400 fps is no joke.

Not real practical, but I also got to shoot a .510 Van Horn.
That's a shortened .460 Weatherby, so it works in a regular size action,
with a 600 grain Barnes bullet, at 2150 fps, in 510 caliber. It flattens stuff,
goes in a bolt rifle, but ammo is not easy to find.

I do like the Nitro Expresses. 450 and 500. Friend converted a Pedroselli
45-70 double to 450 Nitro Express. Light, hits hard on both ends.

.500 Nitro in a large rifle doesn't kick that much more, and, I like the extra 100 grains or more, and it moves into a different class. They all work.

Funny that the .416 Rigby fits in much the same place on the rifle scale as the .40 S&W or 10MM do in the pistol world, except it's not exactly
a round that lends itself to high capacity magazines.

 

[wildehond]

Thread tangent

Prosser.

The big appeal for the Professional Hunters (PH) is that the 416 Rigby has excellent penetration as proved in real world experiences. The PH has to stand and shoot if the client mess up a shot. Cape buffalo is normally shot in ranges of 70-50m or less. You DO NOT want to stalk a wounded cape buffalo. By far the most dangerous animal to hunt out of the big five. Only a shot thought the heart or a shot through the brain will stop it. Some guys can hit the spine when a buff charges but that is really risky. A number of people have died trying this shot. The cape Buffalo also goes back on it's spoor to come and look for you so it can horn you to death. This happens every year, a few times. This is normally dense bush and you might have see it when it is 30m away.

So the PH want a rifle cartridge that will fully penetrate a cape buffalo in a diagonal shot from the rear hoping that you will get the heart in the process. This is where the 416 Rigby comes into it's own. The 458 Lott will probably do the same but a full house 458 Lott kicks like mule where 416 Rigby is much more pleasant to shoot.

I do not hunt much anymore. Can not pull the trigger. I love the living the 'velt' (bush) and the anticipation and stalking.

 

[Prosser]

WARNING:
OFF thread topic, slightly:
wildehond:
I'm not small.
.458 Lott: 500 grains, 2350 fps


.510 Van Horn: 600 grains. 510 caliber, 2150 fps:




Never shot the Rigby. Love the big case and low pressure. If penetration is premium, a .505 Gibbs comes to mind, or the .460 Weatherby with solids.

Money wise, 375 and 458 win mag or Lott are WAY cheaper then the .416.

The sad part is the .416 Remington Magnum gives you everything the .416 R does, except low pressure. It gives you the same ballistics, and a couple extra rounds in the mag, and far less cost.

There are some really terrifying stories of guys hunting buffalo in Africa, and finding themselves in the middle of about 10 lions, hunting the same buffalo.
Problem:
10 lions, 2 double rifles. The lions win, if they want. Odd, but I don't think female hunting lions play by the same rules as your average street punk.
Their family gets attacked, they defend to the death?

Penetration is the .375 H&H.

There is also something to be said for stoppers in the Class 3, .500 Nitro Express and above range. It's nice to have a rifle that hits hard enough so the animal goes down, even if it gets right back up.

We had one guy on another forum, Safarikid, that was using a 900 grain bullet, in .622" caliber, IIRC, at about 2150 fps, out of a 7 pound rifle, with a huge muzzle brake on it, and a short barrel. .600 Overkill IIRC. His results were pretty much a good hit, target goes down. If not dead, hit again. Dead.

My point is there are more, if not practical ways to kill a buffalo...

Always gets me in trouble on hunting forums. Much like SD threads, I'm doing what I need to be prepared. I don't want to EVER have to kill another human, or for that matter, an animal, but I will, to protect myself, or my loved ones.

As you get older, the desire to kill diminishes. I guess you value life, since your frail nature is clear to you. In Africa overpopulation is always a threat to the wild life. I'm more inclined to hunt poachers then I would
be to hunt the animals.

 

[wildehond]

WARNING:
OFF thread topic, slightly:
wildehond:
I'm not small.
.458 Lott: 500 grains, 2350 fps

"When the hammer drops..., you KNOW there is ignition"

Like the one local gun writer once put is so eloquently!

 

[orionengnr]

or not.

The only real advantage of .40 S&W is that is a compromise.

I have owned a bunch of .40s since the late 80s, and no longer own any.

If I want a pocket sized handgun, I carry a Kahr PM9. That happens about 10 days per year. In general, when my aging back is killing me...as it is today.

The rest of the year, I carry a 1911. That takes care of the other 355 days.

About eight years ago, I qualified for my initial CHL with a Glock G23. Shot 246/250, which I was preety happy with at the time, but now realize is pretty pitiful. Most recent requal was with a 1911...250/250 with ease.

Yes, a .40 or a 9mm holds more rounds. But I carry what I shoot best. I'd rather hit once than miss three times.

I realize that the two are not mutually exclusive. But...my mantra is...figure out what you shoot best, and carry that, regardless of capacity.

Only hits count.

 

[B!ngo]

Yep, re #2 and #3. I lean towards that function that states that one should use the smallest round as viewed as 'effective' so that you can maximize the number of rounds carried.
Some will say, 'it's all about shot placement'. Beyond the response of, 'of course', the reality is that placement under pressure is always challenging, more is thus better than less, and if carrying too many rounds bothers you, just take a few out and you have a lighter carry.
B

OK...you've presented your arguments for the 40...now present the arguments against or for the 9mm. After all, when you make a decision, do you simply look at the points that justify that which you already believe, or do you weigh the pros / cons?

Lemme help you with a few:
1. You mistakenly assume everyone is carrying +P. There is a letter floating around from a Winchester ballistics engineer that says they recommend their 9mm 147 gr. 'normal' loads in short barreled guns - longer dwell time in the barrel means a more complete powder burn before the bullet exits the barrel.
2. I always weigh caliber vs. round count when deciding. When I purchased my old (pre-Melonite) XDSC40, their XDSC9 held only 10 rounds, the 40 held 9 - I figured I'd take 9 rounds of 40 over 10 rounds of 9mm. When they redesigned the 9mm magazines to hold 13 rounds, the scales tilted towards the 9mm - I'll take 13 rounds of 9mm over 9 rounds of 40.
3. Folks are always behind the curve - BG tactics have been changing / evolving over the years - there now seems to be more cases of multiple attackers than in the past. Because of this, round count now weighs more heavily in my decision than in the past.

No caliber war here - I own both, but I recommend to most folks approaching me asking 'bout upgrading their SD guns, or buying their first gun that they start with the 9mm.

Over the years I've tended to move down in caliber as SD ammo has improved. I've gone from a 45 to a 40 to mostly 9mm for my carry guns these days.

 

[Robert]

Enough wandering around.