It seems like auto's not in 9mm, or 45, is being sold off cheap by dealers

[BSA1]

Likely it will all come full circle at some point. Paul Harrell's youtube video "9mm vs .40 S&W" from March this year is pretty eye opening. His testing shows that even new 9mm ammo can't perform (or very very marginally performs) to meet the post miami shooting requirements (or were they just goals?) set up by the FBI for service pistols.

He is full of sheep dip.

Check out the Ammo Quest videos by Shooting The Bull. He has tested a lot of 9mm ammunition from small 3" barrel semi-autos using FBI test criteria.

 

[Mn Fats]

Not a fan of the .40 s&w. I think it was a stupid conception. That said, I like shooting (most) guns that reliably go bang no matter the cartridge they're chambered in. I like them even better when the price is low. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a gun chambered in (insert cartridge here) if the quality was high and the price was low.

 

[bnolsen]

He is full of sheep dip.

Check out the Ammo Quest videos by Shooting The Bull. He has tested a lot of 9mm ammunition from small 3" barrel semi-autos using FBI test criteria.

I looked through his channel. Does he do any testing aside from ballistic gel? I know some of the new wonder rounds that look like they tear up ballistic gel act like FMJs when shot into pork shoulders. I know everything has to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Just saying, sooner or later, the pendulum will swing again in favor of the 40.

Not likely. Every condition that was present in the 1990s which contributed to it's commercial success then is gone now.

-No longer is there a choice between 10 rounds of 9mm vs. 10 rounds .40. Virtually all 9mm full size pistols will have 2-3 more rounds in a flush mag.

-Bullet technology made 9mm every bit as effective as .40.

-CCW took off big time post sunset, and .40 is just too much for many people (and sometimes guns) to handle in the subcompact & micro category, where 9mm guns also hold one or two extra rounds in the same package.

-Suppressors are now wildly popular, ownership increasing at a tremendous rate, and .40 is a poor candidate for suppression with almost every commercial load being super sonic, whilst heavy 9mm and just about all .45 loads are subsonic.

-Less required materials and economy of scale keeps 9mm substantially cheaper for range use and plinking.

-10mm has been steadily increasing in popularity over the last decade (three options in the mid 1990s compared to a couple dozen production pistols so chambered today), and while less significant than other factors, does grab a share of the market that might have otherwise gone .40.

 

[ATLDave]

-Bullet technology made 9mm every bit as effective as .40.

I agree that's the current CW. I have my doubts, but that is what most people say/think today. Balrog thinks that the CW on that will shift. Given how often this stuff has changed over time, it's hard to confidently say that he's wrong.

 

[pblanc]

Not likely. Every condition that was present in the 1990s which contributed to it's commercial success then is gone now.

-No longer is there a choice between 10 rounds of 9mm vs. 10 rounds .40. Virtually all 9mm full size pistols will have 2-3 more rounds in a flush mag.

-Bullet technology made 9mm every bit as effective as .40.

-CCW took off big time post sunset, and .40 is just too much for many people (and sometimes guns) to handle in the subcompact & micro category, where 9mm guns also hold one or two extra rounds in the same package.

-Suppressors are now wildly popular, ownership increasing at a tremendous rate, and .40 is a poor candidate for suppression with almost every commercial load being super sonic, whilst heavy 9mm and just about all .45 loads are subsonic.

-Less required materials and economy of scale keeps 9mm substantially cheaper for range use and plinking.

-10mm has been steadily increasing in popularity over the last decade (three options in the mid 1990s compared to a couple dozen production pistols so chambered today), and while less significant than other factors, does grab a share of the market that might have otherwise gone .40.

In the past it was pretty widely assumed that 9mm Luger was less effective than .40 S&W. For bullet technology to have now made 9 mm every bit as effective as .40, we would have to assume that somehow 9 mm projectile technology advanced while somehow .40 S&W projectile technology remained at a standstill.

There are many 180 grain commercial loads that are subsonic. Even Underwood's 180 grain JHP Speer and Nosler loads are rated at a muzzle velocity of 1100 fps, less than the speed of sound at most altitudes and temperatures.

 

[MachIVshooter]

In the past it was pretty widely assumed that 9mm Luger was less effective than .40 S&W. For bullet technology to have now made 9 mm every bit as effective as .40, we would have to assume that somehow 9 mm projectile technology advanced while somehow .40 S&W projectile technology remained at a standstill.

There are many 180 grain commercial loads that are subsonic. Even Underwood's 180 grain JHP Speer and Nosler loads are rated at a muzzle velocity of 1100 fps, less than the speed of sound at most altitudes and temperatures.

More attention has been given to .355" bullet design than .400", and you can't simply scale things like that. At any rate, talk to a trauma surgeon or ME, they'll tell you that it's nigh impossible to distinguish between service cartridges by the wounds alone.

As for subsonic velocities, you do realize the speed of sound drops below 1,100 FPS at just 1,500 ft, right? Most of the country is higher than that. The mean elevation of the united states is 2,500 ft. Here in CO, we enjoy a mean elevation of 6,800 ft, the highest of any state. Finding true subs is more difficult here.

 

[pblanc]

More attention has been given to .355" bullet design than .400", and you can't simply scale things like that. At any rate, talk to a trauma surgeon or ME, they'll tell you that it's nigh impossible to distinguish between service cartridges by the wounds alone.

As for subsonic velocities, you do realize the speed of sound drops below 1,100 FPS at just 1,500 ft, right? Most of the country is higher than that. The mean elevation of the united states is 2,500 ft. Here in CO, we enjoy a mean elevation of 6,800 ft, the highest of any state. Finding true subs is more difficult here.

I picked Underwood because it is loaded fairly hot. The muzzle velocity for most 180 grain commercial .40 S&W is under 1000 fps and about the same as standard pressure 147 grain 9mm Luger.

I do not need to talk to a trauma surgeon. I was a trauma surgeon (general and vascular surgery) at a Level II trauma center, and have seen a fair number of gunshot wounds during the course of my career and operated on a goodly number as well. Animal tissue is elastic and recoils. Projectiles do not drill neat holes through tissue like a carbide bit through a piece of sheet metal. You cannot take a caliper and measure a small difference in crush channel diameter. Projectiles also behave somewhat erratically. Sometimes exit wounds are large and ragged. Sometimes they are slit-like. And that can occur even with two different wounds of the same caliber. Furthermore, wound channels become distorted by the formation of hematomas.

So while yes, it is generally not possible to determine projectile caliber by doing measurements of wound channels in the OR or the morgue, that does not mean that they are all equivalent. If you look at the expansion data of JHP loads from ballistic gel testing, the best performing 9 mm Luger loads expand by about 100% of their original diameter to about .71". And the best performing .40 S&W loads do the same, up to about .82".

Now a permanent wound channel .10-.11" greater in diameter is a little more than the difference in diameter between unexpanded 9 mm FMJ ammo and unexpanded .45 ACP FMJ ammo. And it has been long assumed, rightly or wrongly, that when limited to ball ammo, .45 ACP is generally more effective than 9 mm Luger.

How often will a crush channel that is about .05" in radius going to impact a critical structure that a projectile .05" less in radius? Probably very few times, but not never. The difference would never trump better shot placement, or more rapid accurate shooting, but for single shot handgun wounds I am confident based on my experience that there will very occasionally be a difference in effectiveness due to a slightly greater diameter permanent wound channel.

 

[tarosean]

how many 40 is dead threads do we need running at one time?

 

[Walkalong]

It's not dead, nor is it dying, but it has certainly lost some market share.

 

[Balrog]

More attention has been given to .355" bullet design than .400", and you can't simply scale things like that. At any rate, talk to a trauma surgeon or ME, they'll tell you that it's nigh impossible to distinguish between service cartridges by the wounds alone.

As for subsonic velocities, you do realize the speed of sound drops below 1,100 FPS at just 1,500 ft, right? Most of the country is higher than that. The mean elevation of the united states is 2,500 ft. Here in CO, we enjoy a mean elevation of 6,800 ft, the highest of any state. Finding true subs is more difficult here.

I do a good bit of trauma surgery, and I would say you are correct. Trauma surgeons see little difference in wounds. But I am not sure trauma surgeons are a good group to necessarily ask, since we do not see the ones that are killed in the field.

9mm technology has advanced, at least as it performs in ballistic gel. It is difficult to say if that translates into real world significance. Maybe it does, or maybe not. I suspect in 10 years police will be bored with the 9mm again though. It will be about time to get new guns anyway, and there will be some event where 9mm is felt to perform sub optimally, and 40 may well become more popular. In any event, I do not see 40 going away.

All that said, although I own 40 caliber handguns, I do not carry them a lot, nor do I shoot mine very much. I prefer a 9mm or 45, and am more likely to carry a 9mm than anything else. For what its worth I do carry Federal HSTs in it.

10mm has seen increased popularity recently. I have owned quite a few 10mm but the only one I still have a G29. I really don't see much point in the 10mm for my uses. Its an interesting cartridge, but I think it waxes in wanes in popularity based on shooters just wanting to try something new from time to time. There is very little reason to carry a 10mm over a 45, 40 or even 9mm. Of course, someone will now chime in that it might be useful against dangerous animals, but I really don't worry to much about grizzly bears eating me in Georgia.

 

[MachIVshooter]

In any event, I do not see 40 going away.

No, it's not going away. Was far too mainstream for too long, too many so-chambered firearms owned and on the market. But I also highly doubt it will relive it's former glory for the reasons I stated in post #54.

10mm has seen increased popularity recently. I have owned quite a few 10mm but the only one I still have a G29. I really don't see much point in the 10mm for my uses. Its an interesting cartridge, but I think it waxes in wanes in popularity based on shooters just wanting to try something new from time to time. There is very little reason to carry a 10mm over a 45, 40 or even 9mm. Of course, someone will now chime in that it might be useful against dangerous animals, but I really don't worry to much about grizzly bears eating me in Georgia.

For general defensive use, I would agree that the 10mm (and .357 magnum) offer no real improvement over 9mm, .38 spl, .40 or .45. Having said that, the 10mm and .357 mag do offer significantly better penetration with proper bullet selection than the standard service cartridges, which is why some folks opt for them under certain circumstances, such as cold weather carry, when heavy winter clothing can substantially hamper penetration. They do, of course, come at the price increased recoil and (usually) larger firearms, which is why they remain on the fringe for carry guns, .9mm, .380 ACP and .38 Spl. dominating that market, with .40 & .45 taking up a share as well. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool 10mm guy, own five of them, but the extreme majority of the time, you'll find me carrying a 6+1 9mm micro.

 

[kcofohio]

The prices of the 40 guns has made me consider getting a conversion barrel for my M&P40 to a 9mm. Not gonna sell that gun for such a loss. Maybe next go around.

 

[If1HitU]

I have enough 40"s three,I see the price dropping to when i'm in my LGS, on 9mm too.

 

[CDR_Glock]

The Glock 23 and 27 were my only 40 caliber pistols. I had them for a long g time. I sold the 27. I converted the 23 to a Roni Micro Stabilizer.

I only like the 40 Cal by HK. It is easier to shoot and the grips are more comfortable. I have a bunch of 9mm pistols and the 45s, plus revolvers. I have no need for 40. It isn't adequate for hunting compared to what I have. I already have enough for CCW.

I don't care too much for 40, as it is a solution to a problem that was never needed, I'd get a 10 mm before I got another 40.