What's up with all the .40S&W ragging?

[jim goose]

There is a place for every caliber. To me, 40 SW is a good one gun caliber. So is the .357 sig.

If I'm going to have two guns, well then, a 9mm and a .45 acp are better options.

On the flipside, most gun pro's ive dealt with have told me the 40SW has a spin on it that make follow ups harder.

 

[Walkalong]

The .40 does everything a .45 does, and it does it in a gun the same size as a 9mm, and with more magazine capacity than a .45

A .45 will always be unnecessarily large and heavy.

This doesn't fly. There are 9MMs that are larger than the 1911. Put the .40 in a Beretta 92 and it is a .40 in a gun bigger than a 1911. There are compact guns in all calibers these days.

But all that said, the 9MM vs .40 vs .45 is a dumb debate.

The OP asked about why folks hate on the fourty, not what caliber is best.

 

[David E]

9mm started the whole double-column mag thing,

The first handgun that used a detachable staggered magazine was the Savage Model 1907, chambered in .32 and .380

40SW busted onto the scene amidst a trend for smaller guns. It was introduced first on the Glock platform

Negative. The caliber was introduced simultaneously with the Smith and Wesson Model 4006 at the 1990 SHOT show. Hence the full caliber designation ".40 Smith & Wesson.". Gaston WISHES he had dibs on the .40!

"Snappy" is a stigma that will stay with the round, forever, because it was snappy in the platform it was introduced on.

The 4006 was all stainless steel. Nothing at all "snappy" from that gun.

 

[walker944]

I won't buy anything in .40 S&W. Never have, and have not plans to do so in the future. The caliber has lasted longer than I ever thought it would.

 

[Bozwell]

In other words those making the "9mm is as good as.." argument either are unaware that they're latching on to the round finally passing a minimal benchmark, or they see is as a case of a pass/fail criteria, and anything beyond what's called for to get a "pass" is overkill.

I think it's more the latter, and there's really some truth to that school of thought. A given bullet can only expand so much. You'll never see a 9mm or .40S&W expand to 5" or something like that. As such, so long as a bullet achieves reliable expansion and holds together, you're set for the expansion prong of the analysis. Likewise, when it comes to penetration, the human body is only so thick, even when you account for arms being in the way, heavy clothing, big muscles, etc. Once you reach a certain level of penetration, you're not really gaining much with additional penetration.

So, when you have 9mm rounds that will penetrate in the range of 12-18" and expand reliably, you've satisfied the basic criteria for a SD round. Higher capacity and less "snappiness" from the same platform, relative to the .40S&W, are just icing on the cake. At that point, if you need something larger to stop whatever is threatening you, the correct answer is probably a rifle, and not a larger pistol round.

That said, caliber debates are largely a fruitless exercise. If you feel more comfortable with .40S&W as opposed to a 9mm or .45acp, by all means carry one. At some point, the actual performance differences are pretty trivial and it comes down to what is more reassuring to you.

 

[mooner]

Negative. The caliber was introduced simultaneously with the Smith and Wesson Model 4006 at the 1990 SHOT show. Hence the full caliber designation ".40 Smith & Wesson.". Gaston WISHES he had dibs on the .40!

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Smith released the 40 S&W cartridge, but didn't have a gun for it yet. Glock snagged a round at one of the big shows (Shot?) and released his gun (mabe the 22?) chambered in 40 S&W before Smith did - serious embarrassment.

 

[allaroundhunter]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Smith released the 40 S&W cartridge, but didn't have a gun for it yet. Glock snagged a round at one of the big shows (Shot?) and released his gun (mabe the 22?) chambered in 40 S&W before Smith did - serious embarrassment.

This is correct, Glock introduced the Model 22 before S&W introduced a handgun capable of firing a cartridge of their own design. An embarrassment indeed.

That is, introduced and made available a handgun chambered in .40 S&W.

 

[David E]

Smith introduced the 4006 WITH the .40 S&W at the January 17th. 1990 SHOT show. Maybe they only had one prototype completed, but it was there.

The problem was they had none ready to sell. Glock got their Model 22 on dealer shelves one week before S&W

But the fact remains, the FIRST gun that was chambered for and debuted with the .40 S&W cartridge was the Smith & Wesson Model 4006.

 

[JohnBT]

"The .40 does everything a .45 does"

Where are the factory loaded 230's?

 

[Kiln]

I'm with the crowd that thinks the .40S&W is a good balance between 9mm and .45acp.

I do think it has been a little overhyped by law enforcement agencies but for personal defense you can do alot worse.

 

[RUT]

>>But all that said, the 9MM vs .40 vs .45 is a dumb debate<<

Agreed! Oh, and add the great gun oil/lube debate to the list.

 

[Kachok]

I shoot all of the above, 9s, 40s, and 45s. All are potent thug thumpers in the right hands. while my daily carry is a 9mm I like loading for the 40 the best, brass FL resizes easier and you don't get random 380 brass mixed like you do with range pickup 9mm, and I can get quite a bit more umph out of the 40 then I can the 9mm or 45. Right now I am pushing 180gr XTPs to 1200fps using Longshot and Winchester primers, feels like a low end 44 magnum in that lightweight Sig.

 

[WinThePennant]

I'd get a .357 Sig before I'd get a .40.

And, I'd get a .45 before I'd get a .357 Sig.

And, I'd get a 9mm before I'd get a .45.

 

[Pilot]

I don't hate the .40. I just find it unpleasant to shoot, and prefer my 9mm, and .45's. A buddy of mine loves the cartridge though, but downloads them for practice so they aren't as snappy. Might as well just shoot 9MM.

The .40 was/is all about marketing and selling more guns.

 

[Thompsoncustom]

I just find the .40 S&W to be a pointless round when you already have the 10mm. It's like .22 short vs .22 long rifle. But to each his own and if the .40 flows your boat more power to you.

 

[Sam1911]

I just find the .40 S&W to be a pointless round when you already have the 10mm. It's like .22 short vs .22 long rifle. But to each his own and if the .40 flows your boat more power to you.

Hmmm... fits in smaller guns (not really very many 10mm guns in production, comparatively) ammo available cheap and by the pallet load at almost any outlet. The .40 is now a far more predominate cartridge than the 10mm ever was or ever will be. Probably at a rate of 1,000 to 1 in guns made and 10,000 to 1 in ammo produced.

Kind of like saying, "What's the point of a Camry when we already have the Nissan 280Z?

Now I could see someone asking why we still bother to have the 10mm when the .40 does most of what the 10mm was intended to do, except for those top-end loads that some officers couldn't handle well. But I think the shooting public already DID ask that question after a fashion, and that's why so few of them are sold

 

[ku4hx]

The honeymoon may be over for the 40 cal (may have been for a long time), but that doesn't mean it's not a good, effective cartridge. If all we shooters ever demanded was absolute bare essential utilitarian cartridges, 99.99% of us would have a .22LR pistol and rifle, a single moderate power handgun, one big game rifle and one shotgun. But being the adventuresome bunch we are, we all seem to want to try new and different things and try and find a use for them.

Every now and then I ask my wife why she needs so many sewing machines and she asks me why I need so many guns. It is what it is and we all have our fetishes and frankly one of mine is guns of all type. I also covet chocolate, good Central American coffee and a lot of other things too many to mention.

Being a handloader that has scrounged for brass for over half a century, even before I actually started loading my own, I can tell you that the 40 cal is a handloader's dream based on sheer abundance of once fired brass (my gun club is always littered with the stuff), bullets and bullet molds. The same is true for many other cartridges and I tend to base a cartridge's current success (read that as how many rounds seem to be fired yearly) on how easily I can obtain components. In that respect, the 40 cal has been a rousing success. Lately I've been trying to find once fired 30-06. They have proven to be very scarce. But 40 cal cases are everywhere and there's a reason for that. You have the once fired brass in such numbers because a whole lot of the stuff is being fired.

Buy what you want; shoot what you want and don't worry about what moves into and out of favor or fad. You have nobody to satisfy but yourself.

 

[Skribs]

This doesn't fly. There are 9MMs that are larger than the 1911. Put the .40 in a Beretta 92 and it is a .40 in a gun bigger than a 1911. There are compact guns in all calibers these days.

Yes, but the .45 single stack gets a significantly reduced capacity compared to a .40 or 9 double-stack. So you either have a couple of weapons with roughly similar size, with a slightly larger .45 platform and moderately less capacity (i.e. G22 to G21), or a moderately smaller .45 platform with significantly less capacity (i.e. G22 to 1911).

The OP asked about why folks hate on the fourty, not what caliber is best.

He brought up the .40 and especially the comparison to the 9. People are explaining why they prefer the 9 to the .40. I don't see the issue, personally.

I'd take a BIG chunk of that action. Lots of talk about how so and so is "going back to the 9mm" but .40 S&W ammo is often as cheap or cheaper than 9mm, and certainly can be loaded for practically the same price, and there are BILLIONS of free .40 cases lying around almost every range in the country and millions of guns chambered to shoot them.

Locally, SD ammo is a bit cheaper for 9 (not much), range ammo is $10/box for 9 instead of $15/box, and the reloading components I've found online are all cheaper for 9.

I also didn't say it's going away. I just think it will be less prevalent than it is now.

 

[David E]

If all we shooters ever demanded was bare essential utilitarian cartridges, 99.99% of us would have a .22LR pistol and rifle, a single moderate power handgun, one big game rifle and one shotgun.

I can't buy this at all, unless the person hunts once in a blue moon, if at all. Reminds me of the guy that points to the 1/2 box of 30-30 cartridges on the shelf bragging about how he's bagged 10 deer the past decade from that box and has another decade and 10 more deer before he'll need to buy another box.

I don't buy a gun or caliber unless I've already identified a need for it. Sometimes I'm disappointed in the gun, but never the caliber thus far.

If all you wanted to do was hammer nails, then the only tool you need is a hammer. But even then, what size nail? Nail size affects hammer selection.

But some of us want to cut wood, drill holes, drive screws, etc. Each task requires a different tool.

So it is with guns.

 

[checkmyswag]

I need my life to be simple. So I go w 9mm. 40 and 45 are great too. But it I went with one of them it would just be one of them. For those of you w the time/money/space/mental energy to collect all three, as it were...good on you.

Pick what you like. Shoot it. Don't worry about defending your choice to your buddies.

Also my phone tried to autocorrect buddies to Buddhas which is just awesome.

 

[Mike Sr.]

Ragging the .40 no way

I have printed out a 40 page report on the forensic study of bullet damage to the human body. Compiled and written by a former LEO, but who is now a forensic expert for his department!

After the first 15 pages ....all i can suggest is dump the 9's and lesser, for a sure one-shot-stop!

When I get back home, if I remember this post I will provide a link provided I can find the link

 

[silicosys4]

I reload hand-cast lead, and the biggest differences in cost between loading the 40s&w and 45acp is brass (but .40 is all SPP), followed distantly by lead cost. Per 500 once-fired brass, the 45acp is about $20 more. 155 grain .40 bullets are less lead than 200 grain .45 bullets. The powder charge is the same. The reloading components (dies and sizer) are the same cost. So for the reloader who casts, the .40 is just cheaper to shoot than the .45acp. The 9mm is cheaper than the .40 to shoot, but not by much, brass is exactly the same cost, $20/500 for once fired....but 125gr. 9mm uses less lead than 155 gr. .40s&w.

 

[Bozwell]

I have printed out a 40 page report on the forensic study of bullet damage to the human body. Compiled and written by a former LEO, but who is now a forensic expert for his department!

After the first 15 pages ....all i can suggest is dump the 9's and lesser, for a sure one-shot-stop!

When I get back home, if I remember this post I will provide a link provided I can find the link

Plenty of other reports from very reputable sources disagree. If you really think that the practical difference between modern 9mm and .40S&W rounds is that much, you just need to do more reading. .40S&W and .45acp are great rounds (as is 9mm) but they're all pistol rounds. If you think they provide a "sure one-shot-stop", you're wrong.

 

[Skribs]

Plenty of other reports from very reputable sources disagree. If you really think that the practical difference between modern 9mm and .40S&W rounds is that much, you just need to do more reading. .40S&W and .45acp are great rounds (as is 9mm) but they're all pistol rounds. If you think they provide a "sure one-shot-stop", you're wrong.

This.

I need my life to be simple. So I go w 9mm. 40 and 45 are great too. But it I went with one of them it would just be one of them. For those of you w the time/money/space/mental energy to collect all three, as it were...good on you.

Yep. All my guns are for SD purposes, so unless there's a reason to have a different caliber, I'd rather stick with 1. It's why I'm currently consolidating from .40, .38/.357, and .380 all into 9, and why all of my long guns are 12-gauge shotguns.

 

[checkmyswag]

The honeymoon may be over for the 40 cal (may have been for a long time)

What does this mean? It seems to be increasingly popular.