CoalTrain49
Member
And that is precisely why they have both been around for over a hundred years. It's not rocket science although many people would like it to be much more complicated than it actually is.
Everyone jettisoning .40 S&W?
- Thread starter OneSevenDeuce
- Start date
- Status
And that is precisely why they have both been around for over a hundred years. It's not rocket science although many people would like it to be much more complicated than it actually is.
Ed Ames
Member
Judging by spent brass littering the ranges I frequent, .40 is right up there with 9mm and exceeds .45 acp amongst the non-brass-reclaiming portion of the shooting public.
I don't see them in excessive numbers on the used market either. They are clearly in the top three for overall semi-auto sales and you would therefore expect that a large percentage of the used gun available would be in .40. This turns out to be the case.
Personally, I like the .40, in a "meh" kind of way. It delivers a smidge more energy than 9mm at short ranges and whatever ballistic efficiency is lost for long range shooting is academic as I wouldn't choose either for long ranges. Plus I can load the same bullets in 10mm so it has a minor logistical advantage.
I don't see them in excessive numbers on the used market either. They are clearly in the top three for overall semi-auto sales and you would therefore expect that a large percentage of the used gun available would be in .40. This turns out to be the case.
Personally, I like the .40, in a "meh" kind of way. It delivers a smidge more energy than 9mm at short ranges and whatever ballistic efficiency is lost for long range shooting is academic as I wouldn't choose either for long ranges. Plus I can load the same bullets in 10mm so it has a minor logistical advantage.
Zeke/PA
Member
I wouldn't even THINK about getting rid of my Model 96 Beretta in .40 Smith.
It is very accurate with factory ammo and not that difficult to shoot.
It is very accurate with factory ammo and not that difficult to shoot.
I have shot and carried a Glock 22 for three years with my my corrections agency (it replaced the .38 Special!) and I am happy with it. There was always a bit of a gap between the acceptance of the round by LE and non-LE shooters, with the civilian self-defense crowd pretty cool toward the .40. Now that the FBI is switching back to 9mm, a lot more of the .40's are going to end up on the used gun shelves. This might be a good thing for the .40 because a lot of shooters may not be able to resist a good bargain. Also, I think that .40's might be miniaturized over time like the 9mm's were and it may revive as a CCW option for many.
CoalTrain49
Member
The FBI said they are contemplating it. Nothing set in stone but they are giving mfg's a heads up. You know the drill.
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportu...c0f178480b6ce1c3922566274ea&tab=core&_cview=0
I think they are finding the 40 to be too difficult for some of their employees to master and the service life of the pistols are reduced because of the increased power of the 40. In other words it doesn't really fit their mission and their budget any longer, which makes sense. They have SWAT teams for shoot outs these days.
Last edited:
If the members of the FBI can't handle the .40 S&W round they should not be members of the FBI to start with. Go shoot a Glock 19/26 and than a Glock 23/27 and see if you can tell any difference in recoil. We did a test where we were blindfolded and tested handgun recoil. The Glock .40 S&W constantly was said to be "lighter". The S&W .40 round seems to be the subject of a lot of internet mythology it seems. Glock uses the same recoil spring in its 9x19 and .40 caliber firearms.
I have a burning question.......just who can prove the recoil of the S&W .40 is so bad that it can't be handled and why do the majority of police department and federal agencies prefer the .40 round.
I have a personal reason for my approval of the .40 S&W cartridge and Glock pistols. I have never seen that combination jam at any time what so ever. I have seen many 9x19 auto jams and .45 ACP cartridge is the jam-o-matic of all times. In my opinion the short fat design is the problem, then again I could be wrong but I have seen many 1911 jam up tighter than bark on on tree.
I have a burning question.......just who can prove the recoil of the S&W .40 is so bad that it can't be handled and why do the majority of police department and federal agencies prefer the .40 round.
I have a personal reason for my approval of the .40 S&W cartridge and Glock pistols. I have never seen that combination jam at any time what so ever. I have seen many 9x19 auto jams and .45 ACP cartridge is the jam-o-matic of all times. In my opinion the short fat design is the problem, then again I could be wrong but I have seen many 1911 jam up tighter than bark on on tree.
CoalTrain49
Member
Me either.
I'll let the FBI decide what they don't want and why.
I know one thing. If the FBI ditches it a lot of agencies will follow just like they did when they adopted it.
MEU (SOC) M45A1, the latest trend in jam-o-matics.
Last edited:
The FBI has no plans to dump the .40 S&W to my knowledge and I don't take stock in internet mythology. It is American as apple pie. It combines the high pressure loading of the 9x19 with a larger and heaver bullet of the .45 ACP and has a very predictable trajectory. It also solved the 9x19 loading and jamming problem of the Luger 9x19 tapered cartridge. The Glock 40 is America's gun and extremely well suited for American law enforcement. This is my opinion and I don't think I am alone.
I'm sure your right
the 9mm is a problem round that jams frequently and the 40 is really a 45.
CoalTrain49
Member
Just reporting what the FBI said. Here is some more. Don't shoot the messenger.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ELFUAAMWPrbbAN58WETE-epinhpHA5ewpcYulPRC_-0/pub
Comrade Mike
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2013
- Messages
- 997
I'm a .40 hater. Just means more 9mm out there for us 9 lovers
Lycidas Janwor
Member
my first .40S&W pistol was a Springfield Amory XDM. A fanstastic pistol. I chose it over the Glock for safety reasons as the XDM has a few more (yes probably redundant) safety featers like letting you see/feel the charged firing pin and letting you know there is a round in the chamber via a slight buldge. That kind of thing.
The problem with the XDM (with the 4.5" barrel) is that it's a big pistol. Its magazine capacity is 16 so it's 16 + 1 and when you have a full magazine loaded into the XDM, well, it's big and heavy.
But here's the beauty of that big heavy XDM--it shoots way, way better than the Glock 17. I have a friend who has a good ole Glock 17 and we went out and shot the G17 and the XDM 4.5" barrel and the XDM is easier/lighter/less recoil to shoot. The weight of the XDM provided an excellent ballance and little muzzel flip while firing, better than the Glock 17.
So for any law enforcement people who don't have to worry about a CC pistol, I highly recommend the XDM with the longer 4.5" barrel. They are "relatively" cheap, high capacity, and a pleasure to shoot. Way, way more comfortable to shoot than my Glock 23, and easier than a Glock 17.
Just my humble opinion.
The problem with the XDM (with the 4.5" barrel) is that it's a big pistol. Its magazine capacity is 16 so it's 16 + 1 and when you have a full magazine loaded into the XDM, well, it's big and heavy.
But here's the beauty of that big heavy XDM--it shoots way, way better than the Glock 17. I have a friend who has a good ole Glock 17 and we went out and shot the G17 and the XDM 4.5" barrel and the XDM is easier/lighter/less recoil to shoot. The weight of the XDM provided an excellent ballance and little muzzel flip while firing, better than the Glock 17.
So for any law enforcement people who don't have to worry about a CC pistol, I highly recommend the XDM with the longer 4.5" barrel. They are "relatively" cheap, high capacity, and a pleasure to shoot. Way, way more comfortable to shoot than my Glock 23, and easier than a Glock 17.
Just my humble opinion.
Last edited:
Now come on now! You don't really believe anything coming out of this administration now do you? Mix their lies with internet myth and any clear thinking person knows what you get. We call it "GIGO" garbage in, garbage out!
The primary method of knowledge acquisition is by reading. Unfortunately all to many people actually believe what is written down under the false premise that it is written down is has got to be true. The Soviet Union called it "propaganda", this administration is steeped in "misinformation" and us common folks just call is "BS" regardless of it's location and method of transmission.
The internet does however fortify the Mark Twain theory of that if " You tell the same lie long enough " it will become truth to the masses.
I kind like doing my own thinking based on reasonable conclusions made by reasonable thinking sources. But that's just me and I am not a follower by any stretch of the imagination. I am an Alpha leader, Whether that's is good or bad is not for me to decide.
The primary method of knowledge acquisition is by reading. Unfortunately all to many people actually believe what is written down under the false premise that it is written down is has got to be true. The Soviet Union called it "propaganda", this administration is steeped in "misinformation" and us common folks just call is "BS" regardless of it's location and method of transmission.
The internet does however fortify the Mark Twain theory of that if " You tell the same lie long enough " it will become truth to the masses.
I kind like doing my own thinking based on reasonable conclusions made by reasonable thinking sources. But that's just me and I am not a follower by any stretch of the imagination. I am an Alpha leader, Whether that's is good or bad is not for me to decide.
Nom de Forum
Member
Last edited:
Lycidas Janwor
Member
Doh, someone pulled the PC card!
Lycidas Janwor
Member
if that is "trolling" you all haven't spent much time on message boards. Go to a sports message board, like your favorite NFL team and see what trolling is all about.
This place is too well moderated to have trolls.
This place is too well moderated to have trolls.
CoalTrain49
Member
I don't think he's a troll. Could be FBI "agent109" and just never reads his dept. email. That's some BORING stuff. He did say he was an alpha leader so he has to be very high up in some agency somewhere.
Last edited:
fastbolt
Member
It's just another common defensive/service pistol caliber. There's always been an ebb & flow to these sort of things.
Yes, there's been some resurgence of interest in 9mm among LE circles, and the reasons have normally included disparate impact types of training issues (felt recoil & controllability, accuracy, etc), as well as cost & availability of ammo and maintenance of service weapons (wear & tear with harder recoiling calibers).
Not exactly a surprise.
Personally, I wasn't interested in the .40 S&W until it had been in-service for about 10 years. That was when I was told my agency was going to be introducing a small number of them into general service with our 9's. I picked up my first one at that time, and shortly thereafter was issued my first .40 duty weapon.
Over the years since then I've bought an additional 5 pistols chambered in .40, and have carried 2 different models of issued .40's (along with the other 9's & .45's).
I learned to appreciate the .40 after many ten's of thousands of rounds fired, and nowadays I find it rather equivalent to shooting my 9's (felt recoil, controllability, recoil management, etc). I didn't feel that way for the first several years of using it, though.
I've helped train folks who complained of a significantly noticeable amount of increased felt recoil (.40 versus 9 or .45), and others who claimed they couldn't feel anything different. Well, felt recoil (and how folks feel it) is rather subjective.
In all the various armorer classes, listening to other armorers and gun company armorer instructors, it's not been uncommon to hear that the .40 (and .35SIG) is generally harder on guns than 9/.45.
No surprise, and no big deal ... TANSTAAFL.
Anyway, now it seems we've come most of the way back around the circle in LE. We're not returning to revolvers ...
... but the venerable 9mm has been given a new lease on life with the better designed & performing hollowpoint bullets and loads of recent years (and more to come).
Now that 9mm is once again among the approved calibers for personally-owned duty weapons at my agency (and new issued weapons chambered in 9, .40 & .45 are in the works), I've seen more 9's making an appearance at quals.
Even some longtime, died-in-the-wool .45 ACP users are appearing among the ranks of folks carrying 9's. Not surprising, as someone who can shoot a .45 well can probably shoot a 9 even better, meaning faster and controllably. Obviously, comparing 9 & .40 has often been yielding the same observations.
Hence, I'd not be surprised to see the small fed agency that is the FBI (13K armed?) return to using 9's.
Now, if the 250,000-odd armed folks who fall under the umbrella of DHS decide to transition from .40 9and .357) to 9? Might be noticeable.
Might be even more .40 starting to hit the store shelves.
Probably more used .40 pistols, too, as the inevitable followers of such things decide to emulate .gov users.
Yes, there's been some resurgence of interest in 9mm among LE circles, and the reasons have normally included disparate impact types of training issues (felt recoil & controllability, accuracy, etc), as well as cost & availability of ammo and maintenance of service weapons (wear & tear with harder recoiling calibers).
Not exactly a surprise.
Personally, I wasn't interested in the .40 S&W until it had been in-service for about 10 years. That was when I was told my agency was going to be introducing a small number of them into general service with our 9's. I picked up my first one at that time, and shortly thereafter was issued my first .40 duty weapon.
Over the years since then I've bought an additional 5 pistols chambered in .40, and have carried 2 different models of issued .40's (along with the other 9's & .45's).
I learned to appreciate the .40 after many ten's of thousands of rounds fired, and nowadays I find it rather equivalent to shooting my 9's (felt recoil, controllability, recoil management, etc). I didn't feel that way for the first several years of using it, though.
I've helped train folks who complained of a significantly noticeable amount of increased felt recoil (.40 versus 9 or .45), and others who claimed they couldn't feel anything different. Well, felt recoil (and how folks feel it) is rather subjective.
In all the various armorer classes, listening to other armorers and gun company armorer instructors, it's not been uncommon to hear that the .40 (and .35SIG) is generally harder on guns than 9/.45.
No surprise, and no big deal ... TANSTAAFL.
Anyway, now it seems we've come most of the way back around the circle in LE. We're not returning to revolvers ...
... but the venerable 9mm has been given a new lease on life with the better designed & performing hollowpoint bullets and loads of recent years (and more to come).Now that 9mm is once again among the approved calibers for personally-owned duty weapons at my agency (and new issued weapons chambered in 9, .40 & .45 are in the works), I've seen more 9's making an appearance at quals.
Even some longtime, died-in-the-wool .45 ACP users are appearing among the ranks of folks carrying 9's. Not surprising, as someone who can shoot a .45 well can probably shoot a 9 even better, meaning faster and controllably. Obviously, comparing 9 & .40 has often been yielding the same observations.
Hence, I'd not be surprised to see the small fed agency that is the FBI (13K armed?) return to using 9's.
Now, if the 250,000-odd armed folks who fall under the umbrella of DHS decide to transition from .40 9and .357) to 9? Might be noticeable.
Might be even more .40 starting to hit the store shelves.
Probably more used .40 pistols, too, as the inevitable followers of such things decide to emulate .gov users.
Last edited:
The troll accusation and the PC card played. I have said many times that .40 S&W and Glock is my mainstay for self defense as well as the FBI's and that seems to ruffle some feathers. I don't like 9x19 mm tapered cartridges because of feeding issues I have seen and experienced. I have never seen a .40 S&W in Glock ever have a problem. SO what is disjointed about that?
- Status
Similar threads
