What good is a .40S&W round for? compromise caliber?

[AirPower]

I just did a search on .40S&W topics and seems that while it's pretty popular for law enforcement, it hasn't caught on in military applications. Also I've been hearing that LE is also backing down from the .40 fever that started it all by FBI.

So what good is the .40S&W, if it's just another caliber to go the way of the 10mm and 41mag? It's a compromised design, and as such it doesn't have the hicap value of 9mm, or the big hole the venerable .45acp generates.

Also how is the emergence of .357sig affecting .40? It seems 357Sig does everything .40 was suppose to do.

 

[mete]

The 40S&W is an excellent round and it has see extraordinary acceptance considering that it's only 15 years old. It can be built on a 9mm frame gun.Very large numbers of police use it , far more than the 357sig .It's performance , in my experience on game is noticably better than the 9mm and equivalent to the 45acp. It's going to be around for many years to come. Don't expect the military to be interested, they're going to be using the 9mm for ever. I'm keeping my 40, it's proven to me to be a winner.

 

[RWK]

AirPower,

I am not a fan of the .40 S&W, preferring the .45 ACP in autoloaders and the .357 magnum, .45 Colt, and the 10mm in revolvers. However, I must disagree with your statement “So what good is the .40S&W, if it's just another caliber to go the way of the 10mm and 41mag?â€.

First, neither the 10mm nor the .41 magnum are dead, and both have strong advocates – for VERY good reasons, if you analyze these rounds’ quantitative attributes. Significantly, last year Glock sold more 10mm semiautomatics than ever before (according to a thread on TFL).

Second, “compromise†is frequently a VERY good thing, since it is the ideal methodology to ensure quantitatively balanced and optimized results. This is especially true when valid analyses suggest that a combination of attributes (such as magazine capacity, diameter/cross-sectional density, mass, and velocity) provides the most advantageous solution for selected applications (such as law enforcement).

To illustrate, using the .40 S&W in "field" law enforcement functions:

> Magazine Capacity is better than the .45 ACP, the same as the .357 Sig, and slightly lower than the 9x19
> However, mass and diameter are better than both the 9x19 and the .357 Sig, although worse than the .45 ACP
> And velocity is much better than the .45 ACP, about equal to the 9x19, and marginally worse than the .357 Sig

For ease and simplicity, I have weighed these four attributes equally (I am NOT suggesting that is the appropriate way to evaluate this question, but it is fast). This yields (lower score is better):
> .45 ACP – 8 Points
> .40 S&W – 8 Points
> 9x19 – 9 Points
> .357 Sig – 9 Points

To summarize, I am not a .40 S&W advocate. However, in a multi-variable analysis (for law enforcement applications that demand capacity, mass, velocity and cross-section) the “short and weak†is probably a fine compromise. Personally, I much prefer the 10mm – which employs the same bullets in its lower-mass applications – but the FBI’s migration to the .40 S&W probably forever eliminated the 10mm from wide LEO use.

 

[stans]

The 40 S&W is an excellent compromise and is a good cartridge for law enforcement and self-defense. The 40 is generally chambered in 9mm sized semi-autos, the magazines hold fewer rounds than 9mm, but more than 45 ACP, given the same size magazine. The 40 has the kinetic energy of the 45 ACP and slightly larger diameter than the 9mm. So it attempts to place 45 ACP power in a 9mm delivery system and I think it does that fairly well.

 

[Navy joe]

It is good for selling gun magazines, selling guns to LE agencies, and selling 1911 type pistols that hold 18 rounds to IPSC Limited shooters.

I want one for the 3rd reason.

Pending a buttload of cash for my SV, I own two .40s, both compact guns I no longer carry. It's a good round, but if I have 6 9mm and 4 .45 ACP pistols in the carry line-up do I really need another logistical nightmare or the latest craze like a GAP? I think not, sorting brass is already annoying enough.

 

[bradvanhorn]

It is good for selling gun magazines, selling guns to LE agencies, and selling 1911 type pistols that hold 18 rounds to IPSC Limited shooters.

Good one - I think that sums it up nicely.

I've been back and forth on the 40 since it came out. I just can't seem to find a reason to keep it, except maybe for the IPSC thing, which I don't shoot yet. I just keep coming back to 9mm, which has less recoil, gets you a few more rounds (in comparable high cap mags), and is much cheaper. Don't even mention "stopping power"; that is a pointless debate in my opinion. But, now that I've discovered the Springfield XD (which is my new pistol of worship), I may try an XD-40 Tactical, or with any luck an XD-40 Tactical Pro.

Please, don't even mention the 45GAP...

 

[HSMITH]

The ballistics of the 40 speak for themselves. Anyone that still questions it is biased enough to not think clearly.

 

[ny32182]

HSMITH nailed it.

.40 is a great "compromise" round. Same power as the .45 in hotter loads, more mag capacity, more punch than 9mm. WWB .40 is pretty cheap now.

I love the .40.

 

[MoNsTeR]

...1911 type pistols that hold 18 rounds to IPSC Limited shooters.

With +1 folowers and +1 bases we get 20
Seriously though, IPSC is the only reason I own a .40

 

[Harold Mayo]

It's a compromise round. No doubt about it.

I have seen no difference in performance on game animals or in domestic animals between the 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP, at least none that skew my perception of the performance of the rounds one way or another. If I were to actually lean toward what seems to do better, I'd have to go with the 9mm.

The .40 S&W is harsh in recoil compared to the other two rounds and has a reputation for tearing up guns in which it is chambered.

It's a handgun round that happens to have a lot of advocates because they can have a "4" as the first number in the caliber and yet have a higher-capacity pistol than they would with a .45 ACP in the same package.

There's nothing actually wrong with the round but, IMESHO, there was never a real need for it's creation in the first place.

 

[bradvanhorn]

Harold got it right!

Ballistically speaking, all handgun rounds [in the fighting calibers - 9/40/45] are weak from the start, so the differences between them frankly aren't as important as we'd all like to believe. If you ask the experts, guys like David DiFabio of Ammolab.com, they'll basically tell you that all modern JHP are designed to do exactly the same thing, under all the same conditions, regardless of caliber. So why wouldn't you take the round that's cheaper, with less recoil, and gives you more of 'em? I'm not knocking anyone here (at least not intentionally); if you're happy with the 40, then I'm happy for you. I've tried it several times over (I even still have ammo on hand), and I don't want it, so that just means there'll be more for you

 

[Highland Ranger]

Bought my first 40 pre-ban because it represented a compromise between the punch of a 45 and the mag capacity of a 9mm.

Haven't bought one since . . . . I'd rather have 10 rounds of 45.

 

[rolltide]

In a full size gun, I would prefer a 45. I think where the 40 shines is in the sub compacts. I carry a AMT Backup in 40 S&W. The greater velocity and lighter bullets than the 45 make it more effective than the 45 in short barrels. The 9mm in a full size gun with +P rounds is only marginally in the same league as the 40 S&W, 45ACP, 357SIG and the 357MAG. A lot of people carry the 9mm in subcompact guns and expect the same performance as the bigger and/or faster rounds. I recently read about the pizza delivery man who shot the would be robber at least 10 times (he fired all 15 rounds) at point blank range. The guy was not a drug crazed raving lunatic, he was just trying to steal some pizza. The guy took at least 10 9mm rounds before he dropped. Not exactly awe inspiring. It seems like the reason a lot of LE departments are choosing the 40S&W and the 357SIG is the reputation these calibers have for putting assailants down quickly in police shootings. Each to his own. I think any and all the above calibers have their place and any one of them may be the best for certain people under certain circumstances. For me it is a 40S&W in a subcompact gun, the AMT Backup.

Roll Tide

 

[SteelyDan]

I'm missing something here.

Is a "compromise" a bad thing? When I go to McDonalds I don't get the great big drink, because I don't need that much. I also don't get the smallest drink, because it's too small. So I "compromise" and get a medium drink, and it performs its job perfectly. I realize this isn't a perfect analogy, but I've never understood why the .40 seems to get a bad rap just because it's allegedly a "compromise" round.

It is what it is, and it should be judged accordingly.

Probably 99% of the calibers and cartridges available are a compromise between something just a little hotter and something else that's a little milder. Yet it seems like the .40 is the only one that gets criticized for being a "compromise." I don't get it.

 

[MikeJ]

It seems to me, at least from what I have read and been told by LEO's in my area, that the .40 is exactly what it was intended to be; a step up from the 9mm allowing for similar velocities in a larger caliber in the same size weapon. I'm with SteelyDan on this one, EVERY handgun caliber is a compromise in some way, it's just the nature of the beast and the platforms that launch them. I'm not a staunch .40 caliber advocate and quite frankly am content with a 9mm, .45 or even a .38 special +P given the right bullet, I just believe that the .40 is another option and that is a good thing.

 

[JPM70535]

I agree with almost everything said as to the need for the 40 S&W round. True enough, the 40 lacks the magazine capacity of the 9mm, is a much harsher recoiling weapon than is the 45 ACP,and in terms of sheer stopping power, falls short of the (IMO) all time champ, the 357 Magnum 125 JHP.

None the less I own 2 pistols chambered for the round and prior to purchasing my current carry piece (Para Companion 7-45 LDA), I carried a S&W 4013 TSW and found it perfectly satisfactory. With a 10 round total capacity, relatively light weight, and stone cold reliability, I never felt undergunned.

Oh, just FYI, my other 40 is a Glock 23 and that is all I have to say about that.

 

[Jeff Timm]

Since magazines are limited to 10 rounds you might as well get a Browning Hi-Power in .40 rather than 9mm.

Geoff
Who likes to keep things simple.

 

[Navy joe]

Oh, I forgot one. The .40S&W is good for people that are too pansy-a$$ed to handle a 10mm

-Still plotting my first 10mm purchase. Colt DE, Glock20, or Witness... Hmmm.

 

[bradvanhorn]

The .40S&W is good for people that are too pansy-a$$ed to handle a 10mm

Sweet

Still plotting my first 10mm purchase

Get a Delta Elite! They are hard to find at a reasonable price, but I think it's the best 10mm auto short of a custom job. The Glock is great (15rds of 10mm!) if you can live with the grip angle, but I can't, so no Glock for me.

Have you shot a Delta? I'll be down at Lejuene most of this coming week, but if you want to meet sometime over at the MCCS range you're welcome to shoot mine.

Regards,
Brad

 

[AirPower]

One thing I noticed that propped .40SW up is the 10rd magazine limit. For standard (read: 10rd) mags, you may as well carry 10rd of bigger caliber (40, or 45) than 10rd of smaller ones (9mm). And of course it's pretty hard to squeeze 10rd of .45 into a normal size grip.

So we all know the ban is going away this Fall and hopefully won't be renewed or replaced by something else. In this case, wouldn't it make .40 less useful in the magazine capacity area?

 

[gp59]

after many years of shooting 9mm I stepped up to .40cal. and never looked back. as far as the mag cap. goes, most guns chambered in .40 that were designed before the ban was put in to place came with standard cap mags aka(high cap mags) and the 10 rd. mags were for practice. most .40s have a normal mag capacity of 12 to 15 Rd's. so if the AWB sunsets then you will see more 40.cal std. cap. mags become available at a cheaper price. this also means that 40.cal. mags have room to grow where 9mms are pretty well maxed out.

 

[Treylis]

Is a "compromise" a bad thing?

"In the field of [ammunition], compromise is surrender to evil."
--Ayn Rand

;-P

 

[ny32182]

I don't think the ban going down will hurt the .40's popularity in the least.

Among the pile of mags I will be ordering at the end of September will be some normal 12 rounders for my P226/.40... there are NONE currently available since the gun wasn't released until after 94.

 

[gulogulo1970]

A Glock 22 holds 15 40S&W in the standard capacity magazines. That is equal to or more capacity than alot of 9mm's. It puts a bigger hole in what you are shooting than a 9mm. I haven't shot a 45ACP that seemed to have less recoil, yet.

It has its niche: meduim to high magazine capacity, good power, moderate recoil. Has the ever been a faster more widely accepted new caliber? Maybe...357Mag?

If there was a perfect handgun round that worked 100% everytime we would all use it. But that doen't exist, yet. Until that day every single handgun round will be some sort of compromise in some way. So, 40S&W is here to stay.

 

[Roadkill]

What good is a .40S&W round for? compromise

I've been looking down the barrel of something or another for about thirty five years, can't come close to remembering what all I've owned, shot, traded, sold, ect. But I've never had or fired a .40. Till last week. I bought a Beretta .40 just because I haven't had one before. Its not a .45, nor is it a 9mm. I guess that's because its a .40. I like it.

rk