Why the lack of love for the .40?

[Dr.Rob]

I just never found the caliber and platforms significantly interesting to me to ADD to my battery of 9mm and 45. I was tempted once by the Colt Z40 (a Colt-CZ venture) but it just looked... odd. Should have got it, few were made it's a collector's item now.

 

[WardenWolf]

The .40 has an unusual problem in that the bullet can be pushed back into the casing when chambered roughly, resulting in a severe overpressure scenario. It's otherwise a very good round, just one that you shouldn't treat as roughly as a 9mm or .45. Unfortunately, many of the guns chambered in this round (Glocks) are inherently ill-suited to handling the additional pressure. Most other guns won't have a problem, but if this happens to a Glock you'll be in the market for a new gun.

 

[LoneStarWings]

I like my .40 a lot. To me it recoils less than the .45, and packs a litte more punch than the 9mm. The .40 is fun to shoot, and with good ammo plenty effective IMO (180gr Federal HST's). I use a S&W M&P .40, and while I admitedly have little experience and have never used it for anything other than target practice, I really enjoy the pistol and the payload.

 

[Choclabman]

Over the years, I have traded for two pistols chambered on the .40S&W. A Glock G23 and a P229. I did not like the .40S&W in either pistol, and they were traded again.

I have tried the .40S&W, and prefer the 9mm and .45ACP.

 

[Bionicrooster]

Just had a friend try out a 45, 40 and 9mm, and he decided on the 40. I think many new buyers gravitate to the 9mm and 40, but there are still tons of people out there with 9's and 45's so the 40 just hasn't reached the volume level yet. Most of the LE around here have also switched to 40 in recent years.

 

[krs]

It's much simpler than all of this. I don't have a .40 because Colts don't come in .40.

 

[afvoo52]

Because ssooo many people spent SSOOO much money on the 9mm and the 45ACP, now comes along the PERFECT cartridge. These folks don't want to either admit the 40 is the meat in the sandwich, or they are in denial lol. The 40 is a very good round, many law enforcement agencies have switched and due to exhaustive ballistics testing.

The 40 is the best compromise between power and recoil. The 45 has more recoil than the 40 and for some people isn't manageable, yet the 40 has more stopping power than the 9mm, though the advantage be ever so slight between all 3, that with proper shot placement they are equal. One isn't any deader shot with a 45 than with a 9 or 40. The 45 is an excellent defensive round but in most guns capacity is limited to 7-8. The 40 has a good compromise of capacity between the 9mm and 45acp and it can still remain concealable and controllable for most.

I own about an equal amount of guns chambered in 9mm,40S&W, and 45acp. My carry gun for winter is a 40 and my t-shirt summer gun is a 9mm. The honest truth is NONE are any good if you can't shoot accurately. Some feel the 45 is best with poor hits verses the 40 and 9 and I don't disagree, but if they aren't incapacitated they can still KILL YOU 45 or not! while others feel more secure with the higher capacity of some the 9mm's and faster followup shots. then we have the male anatomy issue, bigger gun equals, well bigger gun, these are the guys buying Enzyte from smiling Bob.


Folks they are ALL good cartridges and it comes down to preference, they will ALL fail with poor shots, and they will ALL succeed with proper shot placement, especially with today's advanced ammo. The real issue is people like to argue and this debate will go on for ever. I have yet to see a grave marker say, I wish I had been shot with a 40S&W or 9mm rather than a 45.

 

[Mr_Rogers]

I never liked the 40S&W because I could never find a gun in the caliber that I enjoyed. Somehow, the round seems to emphasize all of the design faults in a pistol (and I include H&Ks, Sigs, S&W and Glocks). Then I found the humble Stoeger (Beretta) Cougar. This changed my mind completely and I now shoot the 40S&W frequently.

I have always thought that a hand-loaded 40S&W is a very good carbine round.

 

[drtee]

I prefer 45 first and 40 second. Do not own a 9.

 

[possum]

i love my .40's as a matter of fact that is all that i own. i have so many reloading components, ammo etc, there is no reason for me to go any other way, and it keeps things simple. one caliber for all my handguns.

 

[sinistr]

when new shooters ask me about what caliber is best for sd i like to take a .40,9mm,and a .45 round and have them hold them in their hand, together.and ask them what they would least like to get shot by.(they usually pick .45)simplistic i know.concerns of "stopping power" and over penetration are mosty academic.same goes for recoil,for 99%of shooters this shouldn't be a problem.train correctly and develop the proper mindset,and any of these calibers will be effective.i practice with the 9 and carry the .40,i would feel safe with either one.i'd prefer the .45 but i pack a glock and their just too big to cc for me.btw... isn't bullet set back in the .40 caused by repeatedly ejecting and rechambering the same round?and what about+p .40's in glock,is that safe?

 

[AcceptableUserName]

In my opinion it's significantly more expensive (in my area at least) and harder to find than .45 or 9mm. It's a cool caliber in a lot of ways, but it just feels to in-between for me. Maybe that's a good thing, dunno. Just my .02

 

[Knightrider03m]

I love my 9 and wouldn't get a .40. I like to hit my target with every bullet lol. I would get a .45 for home defense but that is as far as I would go. It sucks that pretty soon, I would be going in to the police force and will be forced to use a .40.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

I love my .40 even more than my .45 and I just can't even make myself think about buying a 9mm. Well, the ammo price made me think about the 9mm once, I'm really glad I resisted the urge, I hate them and the stigmata that goes with them.

 

[Zerodefect]

Everything here seems to point to that the .40 has better power when it hits someone.....but how deos it move from target to target? Follow up shots? Isn't it considerably slower aiming due to the extra recoil??

If you have 3 targets instead of one, is the 9mm the better choice, based on recoil, not capacity?

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Owned a couple .40's---never again.

1. Funky snappy recoil.
2. Way more expensive than 9mm
3. Loss of capacity--generally gives up 4 shots to a 9mm in the same sized magazine.
4. Strange recoil leads to poor follow up shots----the .45 is way easier to shoot.

The .40 is just an abomination.

 

[.cheese.]

I have 12 handguns chambered for .40S&W. None in 9mm. None in .45.

The only other calibers I use are .22lr, .38 special, and 5.56mm.

My semi-auto handgun caliber of choice is .40. No lack of love here.

 

[jocko]

stigma???humm never heard of that women and pansies crap before. I guess I'm one of them, for I love my 9's all 4 of them. wanna stand in front of one?????

Pretty weak minded individuals to let some stupid ass phrase govern your buying habits...

 

[TexasRedneck]

Geez, guys - give it a REST! If you like the .40, that's cool. If you hate it, that's okay too. It's about what YOU like - not me or anyone else.

I have my own reservations about the 9mm vs. 10, 40, 45 an' 357. To me, it's more in line w/a .38 in terms of a LITTLE light to get the job done as *I* see it - but lots of folks have been killed with 'em (as they have with many of the .2x calibers!!).
If you have a specific like/dislike, that's cool. If you want to offer specific talking points/view points - that's cool too. I just don't see the need for name calling an' such, myself.

 

[.cheese.]

Well, the ammo price made me think about the 9mm once, I'm really glad I resisted the urge, I hate them and the stigmata that goes with them.

Owners of 9mm start exhibiting the crucifixion wounds of Jesus?



I think you meant to say stigma.

Or maybe you were making a joke and I missed it.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I think the .40 was created for people who could not shoot the 10mm or the .45 (wasn't it based on the watered down FBI 10mm ballistics, created because many agents feared full house 10mm?). I do not suffer from that problem, so the 10mm and .45 are just plain better cartridges for me.

 

[Autolycus]

Its just more expensive then 9mm for me. I am on a tight budget but I have no real reservations with the .40 S&W though I prefer to shoot 9mm.

 

[TexasRedneck]

<snicker> I shoot 45's routinely, didn't care for the 10...own several 40's, which I find interesting ballistically w/regards to penetration potential vs. the 10 or 9's.

Oh - and I've also been known ta put a few .500's down range, as well - so much for yer "people who could not shoot the 10mm or the .45" theory.

 

[Bionicrooster]

Owned a couple .40's---never again.

1. Funky snappy recoil.
2. Way more expensive than 9mm
3. Loss of capacity--generally gives up 4 shots to a 9mm in the same sized magazine.
4. Strange recoil leads to poor follow up shots----the .45 is way easier to shoot.

The .40 is just an abomination

No offense meant but you mention the recoil twice in 4 points, I guess 40 recoil is alot for women or small men but for most people I don't think the 40 is a punishing round, maybe because my other handgun is a 44 mag. As for being way more expensive, I live in NJ and even here 40 ammo is not alot, if I couldn't afford to buy ammo I would probably think about picking up another hobby....

 

[M&PVolk]

I LOVE the .40. I find it hilarious that many complain about the recoil, I'm not sure how old they are, but I'm in my mid-30's and have never shot anything shy of a .44 mag that I thought had any significant recoil. Ironic, because I am on the smaller side of things. I can easily get follow up shots and multiple targets with the .40. In fact, during my CCW class, I outshot 9mm style 1911's.

IMHO, the .40 offers the best BALANCE of all the handgun cartridges out there. To me, the 9mm is underwhelming, no matter how cheap the ammo. The .45 is great, but has no purpose in my lineup that the .40 doesn't fill perfectly. More capacity than a .45 with nearly or equivalent stopping power, all in a smaller frame gun that is lighter and easier to conceal. It is having your cake and eating it, too.

The cartridge itself is easily re-loaded and is amazingly versatile, shooting from 135 grain to 180 grain rounds with outstanding velocity. Once purchased, I can't envision the need for 9mm or .45. The .40 does it all. If I need bigger than the .40, I skip autoloaders and go straight to my other favorite handgun round, the .44 magnum. If I want smaller for pocket carry, a J-Frame is outstanding with .38+p. I will concede that I do occasionally utilize the .380, but that is EXCLUSIVELY based on pistol size and form factor. I never truly feel comfortable with it, and it is my wife's gun.

Honestly, I understand people skipping the .40 because of what they already own, but anyone who hates on the cartridge is either overly recoil sensitive or just doesn't want to accept that modern ammunition advances have lessened the appeal of the old stalwarts...