H&K P2000SK 9mm or 40S&W

[rm86]

I don't yet have a 9mm in my collection, and have been thinking about picking up a P2000SK. I've got a G23 that is my only .40. I'd like this gun for a CCW and am just trying to decide between the two. I'd like to make the jump into 9mm mainly for the price of shooting and ease of recoil. Can anyone who has this gun or has used one give me some input. I was originally looking at the G26 because I liked the fact of having 33rd mags, but I've got a thing for H&Ks I've also been considering the P30 although I know they're a little bigger.

 

[mesinge2]

get the .40 S&W and a .357 sig barrel. The .357 is basically a 9mm round in a necked down .40 cal casing. It is more powerful than a 9mm especially in the heavier grain bullets.

 

[usp9]

I chose the 9mm mainly because I can shoot it faster, more accurately than the .40. I like the fact that my USPc mags also fit the P2000 and I have a herd of them. The P2000sk is without doubt the best carry gun I've seen in my years of carrying. Whichever caliber you choose, the gun will deliver.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

9mm Luger will have much lighter recoil in small pistols like this.

 

[Dr_2_B]

If it's me, I go with the 9mm because it's a different caliber than the G23. On the other hand, I prefer the 40 for self-defense. If you're happy with the G23 to handle your defense work (and I certainly am) then swap to the 9mm in the HK.

 

[nwilliams]

I have a P2000sk in .40 it is a heck of a nice gun but in .40 it does have quite a bit of felt recoil. So if recoil is a concern of yours then I would opt for the 9mm version.

One option with the P2000sk is to get the X-Grip extension so you can use full size P2000 mags in the gun, it also makes the gun a bit more comfortable to shoot I think. I decided to get one P2000 mag and one X-Grip to see how it felt and after trying it out I liked it. My only complaint about the X-Grip is that it isn't very tight around the mag but that's not really an issue once the mag is inserted into the gun.

 

[Storm]

I'd really encourage you to try and shoot the gun in both calibers before deciding. While I have never fired it in 9mm I own, shoot and depend upon one in .40. I do not find the recoil to be at all objectionable. Of course, perceived recoil is very subjective. As a case in point, a buddy of mine also shoots one in .40 and he considers the gun to have a good deal of recoil (but he still loves the gun).

I find follow-up shots to be more than acceptably quick (and accurate) but I do not have the experience of shooting one in 9mm as a point of comparison.

My own experience with the 2000SK in .40 is that it is extremely smooth for a .40 and is extremely accurate. When I shoot the gun my impression is that the gun is perfect. There are only a handful of guns that for me approach or equal the 2000SK in terms of that level of shooting quality (HK P9S, Steyr GB, Walther PPS, HKP7).

I'd also point out that with the .40 there is also the option of acquiring a .357 SIG barrel and shooting that caliber. That is something that I'm anxious to do.

 

[benderx4]

IMO, the SK platform is too small for the 40SW. Perfect, however, in 9mm.

 

[MrIzhevsk]

I'd also point out that with the .40 there is also the option of acquiring a .357 SIG barrel and shooting that caliber. That is something that I'm anxious to do.

Why is this an advantage? Is there something that makes the .357 sig more desirable? Cheaper? More power with same recoil? Or is it just the possibility of having two calibers in one gun?

 

[Storm]

As to also having a 357 SIG barrel, I shoot both .40 and 357 SIG. I'm not interested in getting into a debate or a discussion over the round itself, but suffice it to say that I like 357 SIG quite a bit. Had the 2000sk that I came across been 357 rather than 40 I would now be looking for a 40 barrel instead.

Being able to shoot two calibers out of a gun can be a very good thing.

 

[MrIzhevsk]

^okay that makes sense. I was just wondering what else there might be that would have been favorable. And I agree, having any gun that can potentially accept multiple types of ammunition is never a bad thing.

 

[Storm]

Also, during the darkest days of the ammo shortage it got to the point where there were few choices for ammo. It seems that there was 40 for a good while, and when that dried up there was always 357 SIG. Okay, I admit it that I have a good supply of both of those calibers, but sometimes you have to take what you can get andan option may make the differenceo. I think that the ammo shrtage really opened up my eyes as to that issue. Even before that it has been my rule that when possible every handgun in 40 has a second 357 barrel. and vice versa.

I guess I'm not really sure whether I will like 357 SIG in the 2000SK, but I think that the expenditure on the barrel will be worth it. I was originally mighty skeptical about 40 out of the gun, but was so pleasantly surpised when I found the Sk to be an outstanding platform for the caliber, at least for me. As I find the 357 SIG to be overall less snappy than the 357 (I find the 357 to be more of a push like a 45) my only concern with 357 goes to muzzle rise and recovery for follow-up shots.

Having just paid tuition for my daughter's thrid year of college (out-of-state) I fear that the 357 barrel may be a time in coming

 

[Mags]

So why not just buy the gun chambered in 357 sig? I did not see anywhere in the op's post a desire or info about the 357 sig. Not to mention if you have a 357 sig why bother with the 40 s&w?

If the OP shoots his G23 well and doesn't mind the snappy 40 recoil go ahead and get the 40 chambering. If the op desires a lighter recoiling less expensive round get the 9mm.

9mm, 40 S&W, and even 357 sig are all fine defensive handgun calibers each with their own benefits and drawbacks; so just go with what you are comfortable with.

 

[Storm]

Quite simply, I came across a used 2000sk in outstanding condition for an extremely good price. I shoot both 40 and 357 SIg (as well as 9mm) and knew that a barrel swap was all that was required so that i could have both.

Yes, the OP didn't mention 357 SIG as an option. The point is that with a 9mm one is limited to 9mm, but with the 40 he had another caliber possible with the swap of a barrel. That versatility may not be important to everyone but it is still potentially a consideration and was worth mentioning. My first experiences with 357 SIG started with guns chambered originally for 40 and I'm darn glad that I got the 357 barrel and started to work with the caliber.

357 SIG is very different from 40 in feeling, as 40 is from 9mm. It isn't always an
A/B choice, and sometimes C is worthy of consideration considering how we perceive recoil out of different guns. 40 can be snappy (but not for me out of the HK as it was out of a Glock). 357 SIG, at least for me, is not at all snappy and the recoil is very different. The possibility existed for having a caliber more like a 40 that might have offered the OP an experience more in line with what he might fit his needs.

 

[Mags]

Yes, but since the OP already has a G23 the swap to 357 sig would be more economical for the Glock since OEM 357 barrels go for 120 and Lone Wolf barrels go for 99.

 

[Storm]

Yes, the OP does have a Glock in 40, but 40 out of a Glock does not necessarily egual 40 out of the HK. My recommendation was to try the HK in 40 as he may find that it is a very different experience than what he might anticipate based on his Glock. heck, he might even find that 357 SIG out of the HK is also worthy of consideration and in choosing the 40, if it fits his needs, it becomes an option. The man is going to spend a pretty penny on his weapon and in basing it on assumptions rather than trigger time he may end up selling himself short.

And yes, for the record, i really liked 357 SIG out of my Glock 27. In fact, I far preferred it to 40. But, the 40 out of the 27 and the 2000SK couldn't be more different.

 

[rm86]

Thanks for the replys guys. I honestly hadnt put to much thought into 357 sig I don't really know too much about it. How does the price compare to .40? Do you need to buy .357 mags for the p2000sk if you get a .357 barrel for the .40? It might be nice having multiple options available.

 

[earlthegoat2]

357 and 40 mags are interchangable.

 

[NWCP]

The 2000SK in 9mm is more manageable that the .40 when it comes to recoil. You'd do well with either caliber, but I think you'll find the 9 more pleasant to shoot in the long haul.

 

[P30shtr]

You mentioned you were also considering a P30, I have one, LOVE it, carry it daily. I guess it is a little on the larger side but with the right holster you hardly notice it ( I have a crossbreed supertuck). It is V2 with the LEM trigger, i strongly suggest it, unless youd rather have DA/SA. I have also fired the P2000sk like you also mentioned and really liked that alot also. It was a 9mm LEM version and was a breeze to shoot. Only thing is the grip is a little small but you want that in a ccw. Wasnt really an issue with the pinky extensions though. And if i was you i guess Id stick with 9mm, cheaper, less recoil etc. Hope this helped a bit , good luck with your decision

 

[Storm]

Hey rm86, as to 357 SIG, you will find a ressurected thread here discussing 40 and 357. You'll probably hear more than you wanted to know. there are pros and cons.

I think that myself and the other poster who mentioned the option of 357 SIG out of the 40 mentioned it merely as it offered some versatility that you wouldn't have with the gun in 9mm. I would have metioned it had you been inquiring about SIGs, M&P, Glock, Stery, or any other brand where dual caliber shooting is possible with a barrel switch. And, as many of us (read around on the Net) find the P2000SK to be an exceptionally smooth shooter for a 40 (much less snappy than other 40s) 357 SIG might just offer a very interesting option. Yes, you can get a 357 SIG barrel for your Glock 23, and I'd recommend the Lone Wolf barrel, but I suspect that 357 SIG out of the HK could be a very different experience.

Whichever way you go enjoy the HK. If you can, trying the gun in both 9mm and 40 may offer you some surprising results, or not. Also, p30shtr makes some very good points about the P30, a gun very worthy of consideration.

 

[LastShots]

p2000sk 40cal cov to 9mm ?

Can I covert a 2000sk 40 to 9mm ?

 

[againstthagrane]

The whole .357 barrel argument is moot since HK discontinued the .357 p2000/p2000sk and barrels are literally impossible to find.
For the record I have it in .40sw and I love it. I also have p2000 mags with an xgrip and it makes it feel like a full size p2000 in your hand.