Will 40 S&W ever meet accuracy expectations of 45 acp in 1911? Why?Why not ?

[Walkalong]

It's just much easier to find an accurate .45 ACP load than a .40 S&W load. You can trip and fall into a good .45 load.

 

[Saleen322]

...Nonetheless, I'm not aware of any formal target competitions where the .40S&W is used, so there's likely little incentive to develop target-grade .40S&W guns and loads that are as accurate as current target guns.

It's just much easier to find an accurate .45 ACP load than a .40 S&W load. You can trip and fall into a good .45 load.

I agree with these statements. The 40 was designed as a 10mm-lite that would fit in a 9mm platform for service use. It works at that but I too know of no precision pistol event where the 40 is common or even used much at all. As for the 45, here are three stock 45s; two autoloaders and a revolver, that will all shoot lights out with just some load development. So, in my experience, no a 40 will not meet 45 accuracy expectations. YMMV

 

[MASTARBLASTER]

I have shot a lot of 40S&W loads the past 20 years (several hundred thousand rounds) using jacketed/plated/moly/lead/coated lead bullets and like 9/45 calibers, accuracy depends on the sum of components used. Right bullet and powder/charge combination will produce accuracy, like any other caliber.


Above Quote from bds




The proceeding pics give clear evidence that a Select Few have the firearms skills , combining shooting and reloading experience to make the 40S&W give the 45 ACP in 1911 some close competition in accuracy. Note emphasis on "select few" because in my observations for the average hand behind the notoriously snappy 40 S&W, a 5" group @ 25 yards would be considered a very good day at the range. Among civilian shooters of this high pressure round, anything over 50% rounds (8 +/15 ) on the upper silhouette of the torso at 25 yards gives a boost of confidence to continue. Others with similar results after a few range sessions begin to think of switching to 9mm.
On the other hand, those who have shot several 100,000 rounds in this caliber alone and get 1"-1.5" groups @ 25 yards and others who can use a new to their hand polymer pistol with "slap together" reload rounds and get respectable < 1.5"- 2.5" groups are members of a rarefied class of shooters .

 

[LiveLife]

I thought the OP was not asking whether 40S&W in typical combat/service grade pistol will meet the accuracy expectation of 45 in 1911 but simply whether the "40S&W caliber" will meet the accuracy expectation of "45 ACP caliber" in the same 1911 platform.

Will 40 S&W ever meet accuracy expectations of 45 acp in 1911? ... expectations for "[40S&W] caliber" in comparison to the highy tuned 1911, 45 acp platform.

And I replied after posting sub 2" @ 25 yard shot groups with factory Glock 22

So if you ask me if 40S&W will ever meet accuracy expectation of 45ACP in 1911, I will say it is plenty accurate in Glock 22 and should do even better in 1911 platform.

There are many at Brian Enos forum that compete with 1911s chambered in 40S&W. Hand me a tuned 1911 chambered in 40S&W, say like Wilson Combat/STI and I probably will do better.

I used to use M&P45 with trigger job as my range gun to do accuracy testing but it was replaced by factory railed Sig 1911 as it got smaller shot groups using the same load. The greater accuracy of 1911 using the same load is from match grade barrel/bushing/trigger etc. compared to combat/service grade M&P45 even with a 4.5 lb trigger job.

So I think the discussion should be whether 40S&W in 1911 can meet the accuracy expectation of 45ACP in 1911. Apples to apple comparison.

OP, if this was not your premise, my apologies.

 

[LiveLife]

notoriously snappy 40 S&W ... Others with similar results after a few range sessions begin to think of switching to 9mm.

Good point.

I have helped many shooters transition from 9mm/45ACP to 40S&W. With most male shooters, I verbally prep them for the snappier recoil and most of them simply "dealt" with the recoil. With some male and most female shooters, I used lower recoil practice loads that had comparable felt recoil as 9mm which allowed the shooters to focus more on shooting techniques than snappy recoil.

As they got comfortable with the pistol, I used incrementally higher powder charges until practice load was comparable to factory load. Using this process, I was able to graduate many female coworkers, my sister and wife to 40S&W. My 5'6" wife shoots G22/G23 and carries G27. My sister who is 5'4" with smaller hands elected M&P40 with small grip insert and actually shoots matches. The match load is 165 gr Montana Gold JHP with 5.0 gr of W231/HP-38 which has slightly less snap and bark than most factory loads but definitely has greater felt recoil than typical 9mm loads.

For those that are considering 40S&W and do not reload, I would suggest consideration for Glock/M&P as 40-9 conversion barrels allow less recoil of 9mm for transition and cheaper ammo for practice. In the end, for most shooters, it's not the utmost 25/50 yard precision accuracy that matters but practical accuracy at 7-15 yards and there's nothing that will replace deliberate practice and trigger time - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9859706#post9859706

 

[CoalTrain49]

Originally Posted by 45_auto View Post

But in the real world it doesn't matter because either one is more accurate than the shooter is capable of.

Half the traffic on gun forums would cease if we could all agree on this one fact! Wouldn't that be nice?

If you think it's bad here you ought get on a rifle forum. That's pretty much all they talk about. I'm not sure why so many people put so much time and energy into extreme accuracy with autoloaders. Rifles, I can see it. An autoloader is a 25 yd self defense weapon. Never be anything else.

 

[MASTARBLASTER]

Will 40 S&W in any/all platforms meet accuracy expectations of 45acp in 1911

I thought the OP was not asking whether 40S&W in typical combat/service grade pistol will meet the accuracy expectation of 45 in 1911 but simply whether the "40S&W caliber" will meet the accuracy expectation of "45 ACP caliber" in the same 1911 platform.
Quote: bds





I did not consider specifying 40 S&W in 1911 alone but rather the entire gamut of 40 S&W pistol configurations to discern by empirical evidence gathered from a broad community of firearm enthusiasts who have first hand experience with the round in order to evaluate whether any has achieved comparable accuracy with the 40S&W as each comes to expect from the 45 ACP, 185 - 230 gr. ball/hp ammo in a 1911. I was pleased to see that others have achieved "cloverleaf" accuracy in tho 40 S&W at 25 yards, documented in pics and verified by witness. Any three holes touching at 25 yards is evidence to my eyes that that particular pistol/ammo combination is capable of producing .5" groups in the hands of that shooter ! (When I too learn from experience how to insert box enclosed portions of quotes, by members who I cite, I will begin to do so, but now I am depending on memory to recall relevant statements.) In fact it was a prompting from such memory that led me to uncover an old gun mag, wherein I had remembered reading about accuracy issues with the 40S&W, back around 1994. Furthermore, as stated in post #1 of this thread, when I came across a 5 year old post by a member who I perceive
is a highly Pistol Efficient, + Experienced Reloader who was having issues reaching the level of accuracy that HE EXPECTS, I presented this "Why/Why not" thread to discern if any others could get the 40 S&W in their hands to shoot as accurate as the 1911 in 45 acp does consistently for most shooters.

 

[9mmepiphany]

In fact it was a prompting from such memory that led me to uncover an old gun mag, wherein I had remembered reading about accuracy issues with the 40S&W, back in 1994.

You do realize that that article is 20 years old

Furthermore, as stated in post #1 of this thread, when I came across a 5 year old thread by a member who I perceive
is highly Proficient ,Ethical, + Experienced Reloader who was having issues reaching the level of accuracy that HE EXPECTS

Do you have a link?
There is no member with the username P.M.E.; if it is an abbreviation, the first thing that comes to mind is Property Management Expert

 

[MASTARBLASTER]

You do realize that that article is 20 years old


Do you have a link?
There is no member with the username P.M.E.; if it is an abbreviation, the first thing that comes to mind is Property Management Expert

I was aiming to be discrete by only using the initials, "P.M.E." from the cited post. I was a bit hesitant to write his full name lest my reference to his experience (5 years ago) with attaining accuracy in his 40 S&W be misconstrued in any manner to belittle his efforts. Thus the continuing relevancy and in this context right to the point pertinence of that 20 year old article, which documented how 40 S&W was not meeting accuracy expectations by some from among whom are those who evaluate firearms and publish the results as a profession not a hobby. Furthermore, this post is by no means an attempt to detract from the merits of the 40 S&W , which is gaining momentum and respect in the line of duty, in many areas surpassing the 9mm as service pistol of choice.
In post # 32, I applied an acrostic reference to the first name of the member who made the post that prompted my response:
"Pistol E fficient "t" Experienced Reloader - P E T E R
who is a meticulous record keeping firearms enthusiast who hails from the great LONE STAR STATE of TEXAS . In fact, my original post followed a prior concluding post by Peter M. Eikins? which prompted the question was I aware that it had been (1xxx days) since the last feedback on that thread and did I feel my post was relevant. Indeed, I believe it is relevant because issues over accuracy expectation shortfalls in the 40 S&W had been brought to my attention by well seasoned shooters/reloaders over 20 years ago and still appears to be a relevant discussion. Hopefully, such informed discussion here on THE HIGH ROAD will lead to more insightful practices on improving accuracy in the 40 S&W as it has done thus far.

 

[9mmepiphany]

It is usually helpful to include a link to the thread, you are referring to, so that readers can read the original source

 

[ljnowell]

Originally Posted by 45_auto View Post





If you think it's bad here you ought get on a rifle forum. That's pretty much all they talk about. I'm not sure why so many people put so much time and energy into extreme accuracy with autoloaders. Rifles, I can see it. An autoloader is a 25 yd self defense weapon. Never be anything else.

You need to come to the next 2700 match and tell all of us standing on the 50 yard line with our 1911s that we are shooting 25 yard self defense weapons and nothing else.

I think you would be quite surprised.

 

[MASTARBLASTER]

It is usually helpful to include a link to the thread, you are referring to, so that readers can read the original source

Thanks moderator. Perhaps I am not "Unique" among THR members who just simply enjoy following threads to find desired information and pause before posting .Although I hold a high aim to be on "Bullseye" in expression when I do make a post. Some might pause minutes, others months others like myself can be on pause before post for years while reading others posts regularly. To be quite honest I am just getting the confidence to fluently present relevant posts because over the years I have noted the tone
and trajectory of an OP's inquiry can go far astray from the intended aim. Thus I was hesitant to cite the member by name who was having issues with the 40 S& W 5 long years ago according to his post. By now that particular firearm enthusiast could be well nigh shooting sub .5" groups at 25 yards in 40 S&W.

Quote below from member Peter M. Eick from November 7, 2011 at 06:40 p.m

To answer the questions.

The gun itself is a P9 Ultra IPSC. It has a good slide to frame fit but does not have a front bushing. It is more like a CZ75 than anything else.

I have tried loading everything from 135 grns to 200 grns in the 40. Like I said, I have loaded and fired over 15,823 (yes I keep meticulous records) of 40 since 1995 in two different 40's. In the 40 in question (I sold the model 96) has fired 9,505 rounds so I have experimented a bit with the 40. I just counted quickly 10 different powders, 8 different bullet companies and many different bullet types. The second barrel was fit by Briley and they did
not see anything odd about the gun. They said the barrel fit fine and the rest of the gun was in good shape.

My current thought is the 40 is just "sensitive" and is not very forgiving like say the 10mm where the "sweat spot" of a load can be measured in many tenths of a grain.

The problem comes is it worth it? The gun is fine for self protection or carry around the house as it is reliable and easy to shoot well, it is just not good enough for serious target practice. This is the point I wrestle with. Do I spend more money trying to solve something that may not be solvable???
__________________
10mm and 357SIG, the best thing to come along since the 38 super!
Peter M. Eick is offline Report Post Quick reply to this message
Old November 7, 2011, 07:04 PM

 

[9mmepiphany]

Thus I was hesitant to cite the member by name

You either misquoted or addressed the wrong quote.

I do understand your hesitation, that's why I suggested a link to the original thread so that readers could read the original in it's entirety...including responses...in which case, you wouldn't have to name the member. Hinting with names and dates isn't considered good form...there isn't a need to be coy...because you are requiring members to research another member's posting history, through 4 years of post (without a thread title)

 

[MASTARBLASTER]

You either misquoted or addressed the wrong quote.

I do understand your hesitation, that's why I suggested a link to the original thread so that readers could read the original in it's entirety...including responses...in which case, you wouldn't have to name the member. Hinting with names and dates isn't considered good form...there isn't a need to be coy...because you are requiring members to research another member's posting history, through 4 years of post (without a thread title)

Thanks again moderator.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9919035#post9919035
Hope this link works for other members.

The title of the post referred to and quoted accurately from was;
"Starting to conclude the 40 S&W is just not accurate" both the date and time were quoted correctly as well.

 

[mongoslow]

I can take any of the service calibers (9,40,45 )in a similar platform and get close to the same results (G19,23,30s) (Sr9,40,45) I can do the same with the 1911 in all 3 calibers but in every instance just looking at the targets the .45 will look like they are closer together simply because of size, 8 9mm holes in a 2" target doesn't eat up as much volume as 8 .45s in the same 2" target with the .40 setting between as always

 

[LiveLife]

looking at the targets the .45 will look like they are closer together simply because of size, 8 9mm holes in a 2" target doesn't eat up as much volume as 8 .45s in the same 2" target with the .40 setting between

That's why you are supposed to measure shot groups center-to-center and not edge-to-edge.


As to the original thread from 2011, I want everyone to note the shot groups I posted on the old thread were from my initial work up with Promo and they do not represent the best powder/charge combination I used at that time as I used W231/HP-38 with Montana Gold jacketed bullets for my match loads, not Promo.

Since the old thread, thanks to component shortages, I had a chance to try different powders for 40S&W and found Herco and BE-86 to be particularly accurate for 40S&W. My USPSA match load was with 165 gr Montana Gold JHP and 5.0 gr W231/HP-38 as a nice compromise between meeting power factor with preferred recoil for fast double taps and cost savings over 180 gr bullet. It was not particularly for optimal accuracy as in USPSA, stage time trumps accuracy, not like bullseye matches.

I am not a bullseye match shooter but found practical accuracy of 1.5-2.0" offhand with various 1911s at 25 yards to be acceptable level of accuracy with my reference load (MBC 200 gr SWC/5.0 gr W231/HP-38). When I started getting sub 2" shot groups at 25 yards with Herco and BE-86 loads with factory stock Glock 22 offhand (hands resting on small ice chest) that was repeatable on multiple range sessions, I wished I had come across Herco load 20 years ago when I was shooting matches with 40S&W and two G22s (if a pending job transfer happens, I will be able to shoot USPSA matches again and BE-86/Herco will be used for my match loads).

BE-86 was not available when the old thread was discussed but now in 2015, I can absolutely say 40S&W can be as accurate as 9mm/45ACP loads. I do not have a 1911 chambered for 40S&W but do have a Just Right carbine with 9/40/45 conversion kits. I plan to conduct a comparison accuracy testing and if 40S&W groups are comparable to 9mm/45ACP at 25/50 yards, then we can further put to rest the myth of 40S&W being inaccurate.

I can post back on this thread once the comparison tests are conducted with range report.

 

[LiveLife]

OK, found a 1911 platform chambered for 40S&W. Les Baer HC 40 shot 1.33" average (.82" smallest) 5 shot groups at 25 yards from Ransom Rest - http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2009/8/5/les-baer-hc-40-pistol/

 

[Walt Sherrill]

So, it seems possible that .40 can be just as accurate as .45 A.C.P.... If someone takes the time and effort to dial in the right combination of ingredients -- something that has NOT been done that much (arguably because everyone thought it was a lost cause.)