gordy
Member
I have and shoot 9mm and 45acp. Both are very good rounds and have lots going for them. The 40 just seems to be one of those rounds that was made to sell more guns and start arguments on THR.
As I recall, aside from tactics, the 115gr 9mm HP is what "failed" in that famed scenario; IMO, the poorest aggregate performing (i.e. penetrating) 9mm HP there is. Regardless, I think the 180gr HP .40sw is an ideal LE choice for a large, full size belt/duty gun. The greater bullet weight offers better aggregate hard cover penetration than 9mm HP with greater capacity than .45acp. It's a good compromise for that application. In a CCW size/weight gun, IMO, not so much.What I really want to address, is primarily the thought that the .40 S&W is the 'answer to a question that nobody asked'. Really, it's the answer to a question that the FBI was asking, and was asking very seriously about. At the time the .40 S&W came out, the FBI wanted a high capacity service sidearm, but as a result of the Miami shootout, they'd decided that .38 special and 9mm Luger cartridges were ineffective to their requirements...
Caliber wasn't the problem.
Tactics, shot placement, and specific round selection were the areas of opportunity.
If they had been carrying .45, some of those guys are running dry, and/or reloading early in the fight.
No matter what they had, the thing goes badly.
This is the guy who took his gun out of the holster and put it on the seat, so he could get it quicker.Richard Manauzzi: lost control of weapon in the initial vehicle collision, no shots fired. Minor injuries from shotgun pellets
Prosser said:Once again:
Over-penetration is a concern, under-penetration will get you killed.