OK... is .40S&W a safe choice? What do you think about this?

[MrAcheson]

Is .40 S&W safe? Sure, in a gun thats designed for it. .40S&W is a far more demanding cartridge than 9mm. Some manufacturers did little more than rebarrel/restamp their 9mms and call them .40s. This is bad for obvious reasons and is bound to cause serious problems in these firearms eventually. There is some evidence that Glocks were made this way at one time.

Some other companies redesigned their firearms such that their medium frame guns are actually built for .40 instead of 9mm now. The .40 BHP is this way. FN actually redesigned the BHP for .40 so that the slide and frame is stronger etc. I have heard reports that all FN/BHPs in 9mm are built on the .40 frame now from some hipower folks. Thats why those who aren't shy of castings like the new frames better.

 

[Tropical Z]

Does anyone know if the FEG-HP clone in .40S&W that SOG has was done properly for .40?

 

[Handy]

Mike, you didn't say what CONCEPT the sceeer was screeing about. I had thought he was talking about .40 safety, not power. YOU didn't say in your post. Me understand concept now.

I guess it was lucky he hadn't only brought his .22s that day. He wouldn't be allowed to talk about anything.


Glocks are still made that way! Nothing about the slide and barrel has been changed.



Z, I haven't heard about the FEG. I suppose you could compare one of their slides to an FN, but I bet they didn't go to the trouble. I kind of think of the FEGs as plinkers and target guns, since they are not that well established. But .40 is neither a plinking or target load.

.40, if you insist on it, really belongs in compact, modern high cap carry guns (Sig 229, etc). The accuracy from most full sized pistols is going to be lackluster, and if you like a single column mag you might as well move up in caliber.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Handy,

You're right, my apologies. I was too far into my screed.

He was actually all over the frigging map -- it's a wimpy cartridge, it blows guns up, it's not a .45, you can't stop an earthworm with it, all of the complete BS.

"Glocks are still made that way, nothing has been changed."

Wait a second. It's my understanding that Glock changed the dimensions of the area of the case head that is unsupported.

That's where all of the KBs were happening, in the unsupported area of the web.

I know that Glocks with BarStow barrels didn't put the kind of bulge in .40 casings that the Glocks with Glock barrels did.

 

[XavierBreath]

The .40S&W is my round of choice. I love the kaboom stories. People sell off weapons because of that kind of rumour, and I buy them.

Unsupported chambers cause kabooms. Almost invariably in Glocks. Of course the ammo has a lot to do with it too, but the root cause, as stated before is manufacturers tossing a .40S&W barrel on a 9mm pistol in the race to get the thing on the market. When their half assed engineering goes kaboom, they blame the round. Nevertheless, if you stick with 180 grain bullets or less you lower your risk significantly.

My one failure with a .40 was a casing rupture on my H&K USP fullsize. Wolf ammo. I cleared it with a rod, put in the magazine and went on firing.

 

[GLOCKT]

15 grand and shooting

Currently at 15,000 rounds though 3 GLOCKS and the Glock Armorer says its almost broke in at this point.
Electronically heat scoped thru work and no signs of stress in all 3 slides or barrels.
My take on the Glock kabooms is either lead reloads or overpowered reloads.
Thats my 2 cents,SAFE-SHOOTING!

 

[Handy]

GlockT,

KaBooms have nothing to do with wear or stress. After the explosion the barrel and slide are usually in the same condition they were before. However, they failed to contain the case and the detonation blows down into the mag well, destroying the frame, which is not designed for any stress.

There is no way of predicting a KaBoom.

 

[Mike Irwin]

"destroying the frame..."

I've seen quite a few Glock .40 KBs, either in person or the direct aftermath, probably a total of 10 or so.

In none of those cases has the frame been even remotely damaged.

Normally what happens is that the magazine coughs out and the extractor is blown out of its notch and usually lost.

Every one of the guns in question was back in service after being inspected and having the extractor replaced.

 

[jc2]

BUT . . . if had happened during a gunfight, somebody would be SOL.

 

[Beren]

I have witnessed first-hand the fabled "Glock .40 Ka-Boom!" The guy was firing his Glock 27 in the lane next to me, and next thing I know, something sounded like a grenade going off. (Enclosed space, I guess, since it was an indoor range.)

The mag had blown itself out, as had various bits from the slide. The lane "stall doors" shielded me from getting a bit of shrapnel in the face. We checked out the guy, first, and he was fine - just scared white. I was surprised there was no puddle on the floor, but I could sympathize - I've gone through a KB (Kahr MK9) of my own in the past.

I was thankful that the KB hadn't touched off the rest of the magazine. That's always been my biggest fear.

He was shooting reloads he bought at a gun show.

Garbage in, garbage out. Holds true for computers as well as guns.

I wouldn't mind owning a .40S&W Glock, but my heart runs to 9mm, 357SIG, and 10mm. .45 ACP someday in a nice 1911 or three.. No fear of the 40, just no real desire to own one. I have enough pistol calibers to stock as it is.

 

[denfoote]

So I'd like to get a little more input from those with more knowledge and experience than my own. It seems to me that there are a great many experts with significant experience who endorse the forty caliber (even if certain gun models, like Glock, may have unusually high incidents of ka-booms with forty).

I to had reservations about the 10mm kurz cartridge, especally in the Glocks. My solution was to get a G29 (10mm) and fit it with an aftermarket kurz barrel. So far the results have been steller!!!

 

[wingman]

As a LEO I carried a Glock .40 and noted setback a lot. Maybe something with the cartridge being shrunk--don't know. It is as "safe" as any other round."


Setback is bad in the 40 due to cartridge
size and powder volume, especially so
in the Glock.
I reload the 40 and enjoy shooting it
in a CZ, I do not use any bullet above
155gr.
Again watch for setback."increased pressure."

 

[HadEmAll]

The .40 is a great cartridge. Watch the rechambering of the same round over and over. I never do it, but some people for whatever reason seem to have to. It's a high pressure round. I still prefer the 155 grain rounds. The Browning HP in .40 is a fine handgun. Trigger's a little rough but still an accurate pistol. Mine developed a tendency early on to lock the slide back with cartridges still in the mag. It was a burr on the flat of the slide stop pin that get pressure applied to it to force it down until the magazine follower forces it up into slide lock. About 10 seconds with a needle file took care of it. Only problem I've had. Never had any other functional problem. More accurate than my G23, K40, or previously owned P239. I hear that removing the magazine safety can improve the trigger, but mine's adequate, so I've left it alone. I think the .40 is great. Hmmm...... already said that didn't I? I only shoot factory 155 grain JHP's and FMJ's in all my .40's.

 

[HadEmAll]

Double post.

 

[HadEmAll]

The .40 is a great cartridge. Watch the rechambering of the same round over and over. I never do it, but some people for whatever reason seem to have to. It's a high pressure round. I still prefer the 155 grain rounds. The Browning HP in .40 is a fine handgun. Trigger's a little rough but still an accurate pistol. Mine developed a tendency early on to lock the slide back with cartridges still in the mag. It was a burr on the flat of the slide stop pin that get pressure applied to it to force it down until the magazine follower forces it up into slide lock. About 10 seconds with a needle file took care of it. Only problem I've had. Never had any other functional problem. More accurate than my G23, K40, or previously owned P239. I hear that removing the magazine safety can improve the trigger, but mine's adequate, so I've left it alone. I think the .40 is great. Hmmm...... already said that didn't I? I only shoot factory 155 grain JHP's and FMJ's in all my .40's.

 

[HadEmAll]

The .40 is a great cartridge. Watch the rechambering of the same round over and over. I never do it, but some people for whatever reason seem to have to. It's a high pressure round. I still prefer the 155 grain rounds. The Browning HP in .40 is a fine handgun. Trigger's a little rough but still an accurate pistol. Mine developed a tendency early on to lock the slide back with cartridges still in the mag. It was a burr on the flat of the slide stop pin that get pressure applied to it to force it down until the magazine follower forces it up into slide lock. About 10 seconds with a needle file took care of it. Only problem I've had. Never had any other functional problem at all. More accurate than my G23, K40, or previously owned P239. I hear that removing the magazine safety can improve the trigger, but mine's adequate, so I've left it alone. I think the .40 is great. Hmmm...... already said that didn't I? I only shoot factory 155 grain JHP's and FMJ's in all my .40's.

 

[HadEmAll]

The .40 is a great cartridge. Watch the rechambering of the same round over and over. I never do it, but some people for whatever reason seem to have to. It's a high pressure round. I still prefer the 155 grain rounds. The Browning HP in .40 is a fine handgun. Trigger's a little rough but still an accurate pistol. Mine developed a tendency early on to lock the slide back with cartridges still in the mag. It was a burr on the flat of the slide stop pin that get pressure applied to it to force it down until the magazine follower forces it up into slide lock. About 10 seconds with a needle file took care of it. Only problem I've had. Never had any other functional problem at all. More accurate than my G23, K40, or previously owned P239. I hear that removing the magazine safety can improve the trigger, but mine's adequate, so I've left it alone. I think the .40 is great. Hmmm...... already said that didn't I? I only shoot factory 155 grain JHP's and FMJ's in all my .40's.

 

[HadEmAll]

The .40 is a great cartridge. Watch the rechambering of the same round over and over. I never do it, but some people for whatever reason seem to have to. It's a high pressure round. I still prefer the 155 grain rounds. The Browning HP in .40 is a fine handgun. Trigger's a little rough but still an accurate pistol. Mine developed a tendency early on to lock the slide back with cartridges still in the mag. It was a burr on the flat of the slide stop pin that get pressure applied to it to force it down until the magazine follower forces it up into slide lock. About 10 seconds with a needle file took care of it. Only problem I've had. Never had any other functional problem at all. More accurate than my G23, K40, or previously owned P239. I hear that removing the magazine safety can improve the trigger, but mine's adequate, so I've left it alone. I think the .40 is great. Hmmm...... already said that didn't I? I only shoot factory 155 grain JHP's and FMJ's in all my .40's.

 

[Pico]

.40 S&W

I think the short 40 is a great round if you only want one pistol. It is a good in between caliber for 9 mm and .45. I would be careful what I feed it and examine the brass periodically but in terms of safe, I say yes as long as you follow the manufacturer's suggestions for your gun.

I prefer to own 9 and .45 chambered pistols but all of the LEOs must know something because everyone seems to be going to .40 esp in a Glock.

Pico

 

[meathammer]

I own and shoot a Beretta 96 in .40 cal. Only problem I ever had was with Wolf ammo. This gun does not like it. Other than that, it is reliable, and it makes holes right where I point it. I feed it mostly PMC 165gr. FMJ. Cost/Accuracy pretty decent.