Trad Archer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 274
I'd love to hear your opinions. Thanks.
Pros and cons of 40SW over 9mm?
- Thread starter Trad Archer
- Start date
- Status
For me, the recoil on the .40 is too "snappy" for my liking. I can perform faster follow-up shots with 9mm's in the same platform. The obvious tradeoff is the .40 packs more punch but has less capacity.
Some background- My primary carry gun is a Springer XDsc in 9mm. I love it, but now that I have some 20/20 hindsight, I do kinda wish I had gotten it in .40 so I could just throw in a 9mm or .357sig barrel if I wanted, which is not an option on the 9mm models.
Edit- forgot the fact that the 9mm is more economical to shoot, which the poster above mentioned.
Some background- My primary carry gun is a Springer XDsc in 9mm. I love it, but now that I have some 20/20 hindsight, I do kinda wish I had gotten it in .40 so I could just throw in a 9mm or .357sig barrel if I wanted, which is not an option on the 9mm models.
Edit- forgot the fact that the 9mm is more economical to shoot, which the poster above mentioned.
Been done a million times but I'm bored so here is my opinion on the subject.
40 S&W
Pros:
higher velocity
more bullet mass
can fit in most 9mm sized guns
Cons:
snappier recoil
reduced mag capacity compared to 9mm of same size
9mm
Pros:
cheaper ammo
more mag capacity
normally more concealable
Cons:
velocities similiar to 40 S&W is only achieved in +p loads
smaller bullet diameter
To sum it up it really doesn't matter! What matters is which one you can shoot best. I liked how the 40 looked on paper and I tried a few different pistols in 40 but I couldn't shoot them worth a hoot. So I am strictly a 9mm and 45 ACP man.
40 S&W
Pros:
higher velocity
more bullet mass
can fit in most 9mm sized guns
Cons:
snappier recoil
reduced mag capacity compared to 9mm of same size
9mm
Pros:
cheaper ammo
more mag capacity
normally more concealable
Cons:
velocities similiar to 40 S&W is only achieved in +p loads
smaller bullet diameter
To sum it up it really doesn't matter! What matters is which one you can shoot best. I liked how the 40 looked on paper and I tried a few different pistols in 40 but I couldn't shoot them worth a hoot. So I am strictly a 9mm and 45 ACP man.
PowerJoker6.0
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2010
- Messages
- 131
as its been described to me, the .40 is just a comfortable balance between the 9mm and .45
pros:
more stopping power than a 9mm
more velocity than a .45
less recoil than .45
cons:
usually more expensive than 9mm
more recoil than 9mm
harder to do follow up shots with a .40 than a 9mm because of said recoil
for me personally, i carry a .40 glock 23 daily, not because i chose .40 over 9mm or .45 but because i inherited it, and i love it, but have had little exposure to anything else other than my .357. if i were to ponder choosing between .40 and 9mm, i would take into account your hand size, and how proficient you would be with a .40 or .45 as opposed to a 9mm. so many guys i talk to get so wrapped up in the macho .45 big boy gun thing, when i personally would rather be able to accurately place 2-3 9mm rounds than a single .40. try them both out, if you like the .40 and can handle it, get it, but there definitely can be such a thing as too much gun, in the long run, ide prefer not to get hit by either!
pros:
more stopping power than a 9mm
more velocity than a .45
less recoil than .45
cons:
usually more expensive than 9mm
more recoil than 9mm
harder to do follow up shots with a .40 than a 9mm because of said recoil
for me personally, i carry a .40 glock 23 daily, not because i chose .40 over 9mm or .45 but because i inherited it, and i love it, but have had little exposure to anything else other than my .357. if i were to ponder choosing between .40 and 9mm, i would take into account your hand size, and how proficient you would be with a .40 or .45 as opposed to a 9mm. so many guys i talk to get so wrapped up in the macho .45 big boy gun thing, when i personally would rather be able to accurately place 2-3 9mm rounds than a single .40. try them both out, if you like the .40 and can handle it, get it, but there definitely can be such a thing as too much gun, in the long run, ide prefer not to get hit by either!
Zak Smith
Member
With good self defense ammunition the difference in terminal effects are negligible and the 9mm is easier to shoot accurately and fast.
Clip?
Shadow 7D
Member
it's a like thing, either you like the data and guns that fire it or you don't
NO caliber (esp. in pistol) is the end all, and the difference between the 9 and the .45 is just ~1 tenth of an inch (.1)
it isn't that HUGE of a difference, as long as the round is capable, and you are capable of putting it where it needs to go, you should be fine.
NO caliber (esp. in pistol) is the end all, and the difference between the 9 and the .45 is just ~1 tenth of an inch (.1)
it isn't that HUGE of a difference, as long as the round is capable, and you are capable of putting it where it needs to go, you should be fine.
Marvin KNox
Member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2008
- Messages
- 244
The other guys summed up the pros and cons nicely.
But I'm with Zac on this one. I'm of the opinion that most people would shoot much better with a 9mm and it would "stop" a bad guy just about as well as a 40 even if they shot the 40 just as well as the 9mm.
A fairly hot 9mm will go deep enough to do the job. How deep do you need to go?
It will mushroom to about .7 cal. as apposed to maybe .75 or .8 on a 40 at most.
I'd go with something like the 147gr. HST performance or better and feel that I could do about anything I needed to do to any likely bad guy - as a civilian.
Of course, it bears repeating that only the finest carry ammo need apply with a 9mm. But then, for a once in a lifetime shootout, only the best will do for any caliber carry.
But I'm with Zac on this one. I'm of the opinion that most people would shoot much better with a 9mm and it would "stop" a bad guy just about as well as a 40 even if they shot the 40 just as well as the 9mm.
A fairly hot 9mm will go deep enough to do the job. How deep do you need to go?
It will mushroom to about .7 cal. as apposed to maybe .75 or .8 on a 40 at most.
I'd go with something like the 147gr. HST performance or better and feel that I could do about anything I needed to do to any likely bad guy - as a civilian.
Of course, it bears repeating that only the finest carry ammo need apply with a 9mm. But then, for a once in a lifetime shootout, only the best will do for any caliber carry.
REAPER4206969
Member
Pros:
1)Increased penetration.
2)Increased intermediate barrier performance.
3)More resistant to deflection.
4)Almost all available defensive loads give suitable performance.
Cons:
1)Moderate increase in recoil.
2)Mild increase in muzzle blast.
3)$2-$4 more per box for target loads (same or cheaper for defensive loads.)
4)1-4rds. decrease in capacity.
1)Increased penetration.
2)Increased intermediate barrier performance.
3)More resistant to deflection.
4)Almost all available defensive loads give suitable performance.
Cons:
1)Moderate increase in recoil.
2)Mild increase in muzzle blast.
3)$2-$4 more per box for target loads (same or cheaper for defensive loads.)
4)1-4rds. decrease in capacity.
REAPER4206969
Member
And with those hot loads the 9mm's recoil and blast advantage quickly depreciates. The people that say what a huge difference there is between 9mm and .40 in recoil are usually comparing light 115gr. target loads with 165-180gr. standard .40 loads.
rellascout
member
I agree. To me the 40 S&W recoil has more of a flip to it then any other caliber which IMHO makes it much slower to get back on target. Even +P 9mm simply does not move much. 45 ACP is more of a push then a flip for me.
I wold love some clarification your statements about stopping power and the 40 S&W round being "very accurate".
Stopping power in handgun calibers is one of the most misapplied concepts. Handguns kill people by point lots of little holes in someone causing enough blood loss related trauma far more often then by "stopping" someone or liquefying their internals.
YMMVVery accurate compared to what? Data please? Do you honestly believe that you are a good enough shot that you can discern the inherent accuracy difference between 22LR, 9mm, 40 S&W and say 45 ACP? You are that proficient that you are making the argument that its the arrow not the Indian that determines real world accuracy?
Last edited:
I've gotten to where I don't care for the .40. Ammo is more expensive than 9mm. Almost caught up with .45. To me it offers no real advantage over 9mm or .45. Didn't say it was a bad round. But it's just a handgun round anyway you look at it. As far as the service rounds with the best JHP's they are more alike than different.
"Stopping Power or knockdown power" are both myths with no measurable quantity that assures one of one major caliber over the others. An opponent is stopped when he/she either has a major disruption of bloodflow to the brain
or the brain or spine is severed. It's rare but people have survived even headshots. Each shooting is a unique event. No two are alike because say you might hit a 350lb. Meth'ed up monstor or a 130 junkie. The same bullet even if it could go the same route through both could not be counted on to produce the same effect.
The only thing you can do is get a gun/caliber combination that you can shoot fast and accurately. Once you've done that get training and practice lots. These are the only thing's that will give you an edge in combat. Some one once answered the stopping power by giving this definition "hitting where you should and repeat as necessary. Calibers do not save people. Proper use of whatever caliber you've got saves you. Trusting that a .40 is going to deliver so much more power to a target it will guarantee a stop is a good waste of gray matter. Calibers don't stop people. Well placed rounds from any caliber do. Or sometimes no matter what we do do not.
"Stopping Power or knockdown power" are both myths with no measurable quantity that assures one of one major caliber over the others. An opponent is stopped when he/she either has a major disruption of bloodflow to the brain
or the brain or spine is severed. It's rare but people have survived even headshots. Each shooting is a unique event. No two are alike because say you might hit a 350lb. Meth'ed up monstor or a 130 junkie. The same bullet even if it could go the same route through both could not be counted on to produce the same effect.
The only thing you can do is get a gun/caliber combination that you can shoot fast and accurately. Once you've done that get training and practice lots. These are the only thing's that will give you an edge in combat. Some one once answered the stopping power by giving this definition "hitting where you should and repeat as necessary. Calibers do not save people. Proper use of whatever caliber you've got saves you. Trusting that a .40 is going to deliver so much more power to a target it will guarantee a stop is a good waste of gray matter. Calibers don't stop people. Well placed rounds from any caliber do. Or sometimes no matter what we do do not.
rellascout
member
Well said SIGLBER!
Sebastian the Ibis
Member
9 mm: $7.75/50 @ aimsurplus.com
.40: $13.97/50 @ your local wallmart
Since I've bought 2k in the last month that's the only difference that really matters.
.40: $13.97/50 @ your local wallmart
Since I've bought 2k in the last month that's the only difference that really matters.
crashbuell
Member
The muzzle flip of a .40 is definitely more pronounced than the 9mm. The thing about the 9 vs the 40 for me, is magazine capacity above all else, because training and practice can overcome all other shortfalls for either round, but capacity is an equipment issue. My 4" XD in 9mm with two extra mags on me = 49 rounds. My Sig 229 in .40 with two extra mags on me = 37 rounds. That's twelve (12) rounds difference. Something to consider...
420Stainless
Member
Hits harder both ways. One is pro, the other is con. Another con is the .40 ammo is usually a bit more expensive. I don't really consider the capacity issue to be a con.
I will never by another .40 for the rest of my life and would love to Homer Simpson style strangle the people who replaced the 10mm with it.
I hate, Hate, Hate the muzzle flip ive shot in any gun in .40
Ive tried it in a G20 with conversion barrel and it was like shooting a completely different acting gun. Muzzle flip city.
I then decided id give it another try as i feel the 9mm is small and weak mentally but know different. And i wanted something smaller for summer carry other than my full sized 1911.
I bought an XD SC .40 and the flip was so bad it would take me twice the amount of time to get back on target as my 1911's.
I tried for 500 rounds to get better, But i couldn't do it.
I just traded that gun in for another 1911 that is an officers size.
I needed a bug in the last few weeks and the MK series from Kahr lets you have either a 9mm or .40 and i chose a 9mm no doubt. I can double tap twice as fast as i could with a .40
I have no doubts the .40 is a better manstopper due to extra power and marginal larger size, But that dont mean crap if you can only get one accurate shot off.
I also get the great surprise of buying ammo cheaply at $10 a box now when im used to $16 for .40 and $18 for .45
So i can practice my heart out and the MK's steel frame turns the little pocket gun into a powerhouse for shooting as many rounds as i want out of a small gun and not have my hands hurt.
Good-Bye .40! I wont miss you!
I hate, Hate, Hate the muzzle flip ive shot in any gun in .40
Ive tried it in a G20 with conversion barrel and it was like shooting a completely different acting gun. Muzzle flip city.
I then decided id give it another try as i feel the 9mm is small and weak mentally but know different. And i wanted something smaller for summer carry other than my full sized 1911.
I bought an XD SC .40 and the flip was so bad it would take me twice the amount of time to get back on target as my 1911's.
I tried for 500 rounds to get better, But i couldn't do it.
I just traded that gun in for another 1911 that is an officers size.
I needed a bug in the last few weeks and the MK series from Kahr lets you have either a 9mm or .40 and i chose a 9mm no doubt. I can double tap twice as fast as i could with a .40
I have no doubts the .40 is a better manstopper due to extra power and marginal larger size, But that dont mean crap if you can only get one accurate shot off.
I also get the great surprise of buying ammo cheaply at $10 a box now when im used to $16 for .40 and $18 for .45
So i can practice my heart out and the MK's steel frame turns the little pocket gun into a powerhouse for shooting as many rounds as i want out of a small gun and not have my hands hurt.
Good-Bye .40! I wont miss you!
Shadow 7D
Member
I LIKE .40 in a full size (service) pistol, in the smaller package, 9 is just easier to shoot well, I would rather dump my mag accurately than hit 3 time and miss the rest.
I agree with you, I could put a full 13 round mag of .40 on target, But it would take my twice as long to do it. The BG would bleed out from the first shot and drop before i could fire the last round accurately and hit him again.
Thats just me, As im sure many people can shoot the .40 amazingly well. I wished i could as i do feel its ballistically better than the 9mm.
sxcamaro05
Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2010
- Messages
- 91
I like the power of the .40 and the reliability it provides (penetration/stopping power). My Beretta 96 feels good in the hand and shoots well, and I would trust my life to it. The 9mm is more cc worthy than the .40 but I still would like to have power over quantity. Give me 12 rounds of 165 gr JHP .40 over 18 rounds of 115 gr JHP 9mm. (any gr. 40 vs 9mm)
It makes more sense (for me) to stop an assailant in as few shots as possible. Many of my buddies carry high cap mags in 9mm because more rounds= security in a riot situation. I disagree with the "crowd theory" as it is unlikely and if faced with that type of situation it provides little benefit IMO.
It makes more sense (for me) to stop an assailant in as few shots as possible. Many of my buddies carry high cap mags in 9mm because more rounds= security in a riot situation. I disagree with the "crowd theory" as it is unlikely and if faced with that type of situation it provides little benefit IMO.
Because it's a modern round, chambered only in modern firearms, there is no +P or +P+ .40 SW ammo. So even though the pressure ceiling is the same as 9mm, there are many modern luger handguns that can safely be pushed even higher. If you consider only modern 9mm handguns and the hottest of the +P+ ammo, there isn't quite as big a difference between the 2 rounds, in terms of recoil and muzzle energy. But don't fool yourself to think the 9mm is nearly as effective AND twice as fast to shoot. (response #13 and #14, I disagree. There's a relatively large difference in recoil between Walmart cheap plinking ammo and +P defensive ammo to me). You get one or the other, IMO - either faster but weaker, or nearly as much energy and nearly as much recoil!
If you prefer to practice with powder puff loads, the 9mm will serve you better. It's fun and easy to rapid fire a mag of 115 gr, 1100 fps, watered down luger. But there's not much out there in the way of cheap, full power or +P level practice loads, and regularly reloading to +P level might be hard on the brass. +P brass is also pretty darn scarce to scavenge. So if you like the idea of practicing with ammo that recoils as much as the stuff you carry, the .40 might not be as expensive as you think. I've started practicing with my .40's more often, considering that even cheap plinking ammo/reloads in .40 are somewhat comparable in recoil to +P+ 9mm, and my split times are getting pretty good.
I slightly prefer the .40 for carry, because of a specific platform - G27. It only gives up 1 round, and I can shoot it pretty close to the same speed as a 9mm at 21 feet and in. The muzzle flips up hard and fast, but it comes down fast, too. (I'm rather strong in the hands/arms and not recoil sensitive, so I know this isn't the case for everyone.) Now, if my preferred carry was a different gun, the wind might blow the other way depending on its specific recoil characteristics and mag capacity.
If you prefer to practice with powder puff loads, the 9mm will serve you better. It's fun and easy to rapid fire a mag of 115 gr, 1100 fps, watered down luger. But there's not much out there in the way of cheap, full power or +P level practice loads, and regularly reloading to +P level might be hard on the brass. +P brass is also pretty darn scarce to scavenge. So if you like the idea of practicing with ammo that recoils as much as the stuff you carry, the .40 might not be as expensive as you think. I've started practicing with my .40's more often, considering that even cheap plinking ammo/reloads in .40 are somewhat comparable in recoil to +P+ 9mm, and my split times are getting pretty good.
I slightly prefer the .40 for carry, because of a specific platform - G27. It only gives up 1 round, and I can shoot it pretty close to the same speed as a 9mm at 21 feet and in. The muzzle flips up hard and fast, but it comes down fast, too. (I'm rather strong in the hands/arms and not recoil sensitive, so I know this isn't the case for everyone.) Now, if my preferred carry was a different gun, the wind might blow the other way depending on its specific recoil characteristics and mag capacity.
Last edited:
At the height of ammo shortages local Walmart had many boxes of .40S&W Federal 'Champion' FMJs at $14.97 per box. I'm think my next purchase will be $330 Zastava EZ pistol in .40.
- Status