Lets bring this post back to what I intended it to be. It is not about 40 vs other calibers in terms of ballistics or stopping power. More or less it is about the of has anyone else had accuracy or function problems solely with the 40 S&W round.
Yes some new 45 have increased magazine capacity, point well taken..however I still have to see one..very rare around here.....but you raised my curiously and I will try to locate one and get a "grip impression"
Lets bring this post back to what I intended it to be. It is not about 40 vs other calibers in terms of ballistics or stopping power. More or less it is about the of has anyone else had accuracy or function problems solely with the 40 S&W round.
You're just psyching yourself out.I can shoot 200 rounds of 45 in a short period with no problem, but if I try that with 40SW my hands begin to shake and I have to take a break.
On average a 230gr. .45acp +P is going to do more damage than a 165-180gr. .40S&W against an unarmored human target or most animals. The 230gr. .45acp has more momentum and more frontal area as well. It is simply more efficient and deadly. It's more likely to break a rib, breastplate or other bone than a lighter weight cartridge that is moving faster.
nearly .45 performance plus the capacity of a 9mm, whats not to like? (Other than the recoil of both combined)
I wonder how many of the people here insisting the .40 is better than a .45 have a vested interest in the .40 round? Own multiple perhaps?
There is no "nearly 45 performance"....the 2 rounds are basically identical when it comes to power and effectiveness....so it's better to say "45 level performance in almost a 9 mm package"
As JonB said, if I really want more serius "thump" than a .40 in an autoloader I'll get a 10 mm!!!
This thread is do you have a problem with pistols chambered in 40 in terms of accuracy , recoil or reliability.
.and more frontal area means more drag which equal less penetration...