Why has the .40S&W become so unpopular [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Why has the .40S&W become so unpopular


bigdollars
07-29-2010, 22:20
Can anyone give a a good reason why the .40S&W has become so unpopular?

It used to be so popular and now there is a lot of negative feedback on it.

I think it is partly because the Clinton Gun Ban is over and people can get higher capacity in a 9mm.

Also 9mm are more effective now than they were 10+ years ago.

Any other ideas?

Maybe ammo cost?

I don't think it is so much the .40 being bad as the 9mm has gotten better.

Glockdude1
07-29-2010, 22:31
The .40 is very popular. Most L/E agencies issue/carry the .40.

:cool:

rome2240sw
07-29-2010, 22:32
you can say that again. With so many advancements in ammuniton and weapons technology so many guns have gotten better. Alot of people love the 9mm because you can get compact 9mm's that pack alot of rounds. And with the addition of 147gr plus the tried and tested 124gr bullets you get close to .40 s&w expansion. light recoil vs snappy recoil lighter bullets vs heavy bullets. Magazine capacity isnt so much of a big difference. They all hold closely the same amount of ammo.

That being said I gave up the 9mm for the 40sw for the simple fact you can find SD ammo for the 40sw everywhere and the simple fact the 40 is a more potent round. The 40 does things the 9mm cant do without the extra power of a 45 or 10mm.

rome2240sw
07-29-2010, 22:34
The .40 is very popular. Most L/E agencies issue/carry the .40.

:cool:

I dont believe he was just referring to LE agencies. There are alot of people and not just on this forum who down the .40 for who knows what reasons. Alot of the time its all hearsay..:whistling:

TACC GLOCK
07-29-2010, 22:37
I also like what the 40 can do over the 9mm.

rome2240sw
07-29-2010, 22:39
Have you seen this vid?
http://www.kiesler.com/videodetail.aspx?id=1534 (http://www.kiesler.com/videodetail.aspx?id=1534)

This video is a LE ammo test vid sent to me from a friend on here. Shows the Speer Gold dot duty ammo vs the Federal Tactical HST... 9 vs 40 vs 45 IMHO<!-- / message -->

Atomic Punk
07-29-2010, 22:40
because the 10mm is cooler?

Glockbuster
07-29-2010, 23:16
not sure where this is coming from, the .40 is here to stay and is as popular as ever.

FatBoy
07-29-2010, 23:36
Shoot, I'm waiting on my 4th one. They seem to be multiplying.

FB

fredj338
07-29-2010, 23:48
The 40 has got to be one of the most popular LEA rounds & many new shooters will buy what the local LEO carry. Then there are states like Kalif that say only 10rds. G19 or G23, might as well have the bigger holes.

glocknick
07-30-2010, 05:31
40sw is very popular. go to a range and see whay brass is left on the ground. it is usually 9mm and 40sw. they are the 2 most popular calibers.

hotpig
07-30-2010, 09:05
I would not say it was getting unpopular. It is not a growing market like it was ten years ago. Neither is the 357Sig, it was supposed to replace the 40 as the main LE round.

I think there are several reason why the 40 sales are steadily declining. The end of Commissar Klintons ban on hi caps. Bullet technology narrowing the performance gap between calibers may have influenced this also.

I think the main thing is the 9 and 45 have been around much longer and they are out there and beat the 40 in in numbers.

LT642
07-30-2010, 09:06
I don't really think that .40SW is really unpopular, I just think either you like it or you don't. I carry an issued G23 at work, but my favorite glock is the G19.

Glockdude1
07-30-2010, 09:28
I dont believe he was just referring to LE agencies. There are alot of people and not just on this forum who down the .40 for who knows what reasons. Alot of the time its all hearsay..:whistling:

:rofl:

bigdollars
07-30-2010, 09:45
I went with the .40 because I saw in simple terms as a cut down 10mm and it seems like a good "give and take" between the 9mm and the 45acp.

The reason I asked the question is because many law enforcement agencies are giving up the G22 .40 and going with the 9mm M&P.

also because there is so much negative feedback on this forum.

I at one time thought the .40 was going to be the end of the 9mm.

Now i see the 9mm making a huge come back.

Like I said earlier I think it is because of capacity, cost, and the fact that the 9mm is better now than it was a decade or so ago.

I think I should have asked the question differently.

I should have said, "For those who do not like the .40S&W, Please tell us why?"

IndyGunFreak
07-30-2010, 09:54
Can anyone give a a good reason why the .40S&W has become so unpopular?

It used to be so popular and now there is a lot of negative feedback on it.

I think it is partly because the Clinton Gun Ban is over and people can get higher capacity in a 9mm.

Also 9mm are more effective now than they were 10+ years ago.

Any other ideas?

Maybe ammo cost?

I don't think it is so much the .40 being bad as the 9mm has gotten better.

Where did you get the idea it's unpopular? I like all calibers, and saying the 40 is not popular, is simply misinformed.

I dont believe he was just referring to LE agencies. There are alot of people and not just on this forum who down the .40 for who knows what reasons. Alot of the time its all hearsay..:whistling:

Anyone who would make a thread like this based on what they read in this forum, needs to just disconnect their computer from the internet.

IGF

HexHead
07-30-2010, 10:02
not sure where this is coming from, the .40 is here to stay and is as popular as ever.

Funny, during the ammo drought of '09, the only ammo that was easy to find was .40 S&W. Walmart would be sold out of everything else, but have plenty of .40.

IndyGunFreak
07-30-2010, 13:04
Funny, during the ammo drought of '09, the only ammo that was easy to find was .40 S&W. Walmart would be sold out of everything else, but have plenty of .40.

Well I wish I lived near your Wal Mart, cuz it was NEVER at any of them around here.

IGF

cmcinc
07-30-2010, 13:47
I will never be getting rid of my .40's.

IndianaMatt
07-30-2010, 14:07
because the 10mm is cooler?

this!

rome2240sw
07-30-2010, 14:59
Where did you get the idea it's unpopular? I like all calibers, and saying the 40 is not popular, is simply misinformed.



Anyone who would make a thread like this based on what they read in this forum, needs to just disconnect their computer from the internet.

IGF

your right about that. I have read so much negative feedback on the .40 but it still hasnt changed what i choose to carry and defend myself daily. I shoot a glock 22 because 90% of richland cound sheriff department officers use the .40. And if they trust their lives and the lives of the citizens of columbia, SC with the 40 then i will trust my life with the same handgun.

And IMO the 40 is here to stay. Im looking for me a Gen3 or RTF@ glock 23 now.

justinsaneok
07-30-2010, 15:14
your right about that. I have read so much negative feedback on the .40 but it still hasnt changed what i choose to carry and defend myself daily. I shoot a glock 22 because 90% of richland cound sheriff department officers use the .40. And if they trust their lives and the lives of the citizens of columbia, SC with the 40 then i will trust my life with the same handgun.

And IMO the 40 is here to stay. Im looking for me a Gen3 or RTF@ glock 23 now.

I love my G22 .40 RTF Buy one It's grippy as hell. LOL Who doesn't like a .40?

IndyGunFreak
07-30-2010, 15:19
your right about that. I have read so much negative feedback on the .40 but it still hasnt changed what i choose to carry and defend myself daily. I shoot a glock 22 because 90% of richland cound sheriff department officers use the .40. And if they trust their lives and the lives of the citizens of columbia, SC with the 40 then i will trust my life with the same handgun.

And IMO the 40 is here to stay. Im looking for me a Gen3 or RTF@ glock 23 now.

Most of the time when you hear people who truly and vehemently voice their disdain for the 40.. it's 10mm fans who were butt hurt by the FBI.

To me, I could care less if LEO's carry it or not. It has a pretty good track record, it's accurate for me and I control the recoil well.

While the 40 may not be for everyone, I like it. This isn't to say that the 9mm and .45 aren't good.. they are great as well. I still believe that the shooter is gonna make a much bigger difference than the caliber of firearm used(in a self defense scenario).

Anyone who says it is "not popular" is simply falling into a fanboy category, because nothing could be further from the truth.

IGF

English
07-30-2010, 15:25
We have to distinguish between actual unpopularity and perceived unpopularity. I suspect that the .40S&W is very popular with a very large number of shooters. part of that is because they believe it has a stronger effect on the person shot than the 9mm. In contrast to this there is a vociferous number of 9mm shooters who claim that the 9mm is just as good and is easier to shoot. It is, of course, easier to shoot, especially in pistols of the same weight but the claim that it is just as effective is supported with very strange logic. It goes: all service pistol rounds are weak relative to battle rifle rounds so all are equally poor. Therefore you should shoot the one that you find easiest to shoot. This claim starts with a clear falsehood and on that basis goes on to deduce that all that matters is how quickly and accurately you can shoot. The obvious answer is the 9mm. It is easier to be accurate with it for most people and it is marginally faster to get rounds out of the barrel.

We see this argument put with great passion time after time on the internet and so the perception develops amongst those that use the internet that the .40S&W is unpopular. how could all those people be wrong?

English

fastbolt
07-30-2010, 15:27
It probably depends to some degree whether you're considering the LE or commercial market trends.

In LE the .40 S&W has been replacing the 9mm in a manner similar to when the 9mm started to eclipse the .38 Spl & .357 Magnum. The thrust seems to have slowed, though, especially as money has become increasingly tight for many LE agencies.

I still see more .40's in service holsters than 9's.

The .45 is enjoying another cyclical resurgence, which is hardly surprising considering the wealth of new models being offered in the way of duty-type weapons, and the continuing growth of the 1911's popularity among a new generation of shooters in the commercial market.

I thought it was interesting to learn of a local Glock LE dealer's answer to what was the most popular caliber among his LE customers. Several years ago it was the .40 S&W. The answer within the last couple of years has been the 9mm. (We're talking about sales to individual cops, not agency purchases, though.)

It's also not terribly surprising to see the 9mm & .45 seem like more common choices when you observe folks who shoot all 3 of the major calibers (9, .40 & .45), and usually see that more folks experienced apparent recoil management, controllability & felt recoil issues when shooting the .40 than either the 9 or .45 models.

I actually own one more .40 than I do 9's, but that's not because I "like" the .40 more than the 9. (Quite the opposite, in fact.) It's more that I've continued to look for that "best" .40 which makes me want to put aside my 9's and .45's and remain solely with .40 S&W. That doesn't seem to something destined to happen. ;)

I think the .40 is a great defensive caliber ... for those who can consistently shoot it safely, controllably, accurately & effectively, especially in more demanding situations and circumstances using both 1 & 2-handed shooting techniques.

On the other hand, I'll always prefer the .45 & 9 for my personal defensive weapons roles ... and I'll generally choose one or another of the smaller 9's over the larger .45's for my own retirement CCW needs, all things being equal.

gatorboy
07-31-2010, 07:21
I will never be getting rid of my .40's.

Me neither. I've got plenty of auto's in .380, 9mm, 357auto, 9x25, 10mm, 45ACP plus all the revolver calibers I own. All of them have dedicated carry holsters. The .40 is the best all around carry caliber for me and where I live. Good combination of power and capacity. To me it's not the compromise caliber, the 9mm and .45 are. I carry both of them also at times, I'm not a hater.

unit1069
07-31-2010, 07:44
Why has the .40S&W become so unpopular

That's a surprise to me. I see just as many or more .40S&W pistols when I go to the range as I do 9mm.

As for popularity, that's a vague concept when it comes to firearms. I own two 9mm pistols and one .357sig. I absolutely love one of the 9mm pistols and the .357sig. The ammo for 9mm is cheaper so I shoot 9mm more often than I do the .357sig.

But when I'm traveling somewhere I've never been or to a rural/outdoors location I always take the .357sig. because it has greater range, power, and accuracy than 9mm. I'm guessing there are .40S&W owners who feel the same way I do.

cmspeedy
07-31-2010, 07:51
The .40 is here to stay. It was designed to produce similar results to the 200gr .45ACP taking advantage of today's hollowpoints while having a higher capacity magazine.

It also does much better than 9mm through auto glass. Up to 4 more inches of penetration. Not too important to us civies, but a big deal to LEO's.

I carry a G26 daily, but a M&P40 pro is in my bedroom safe.

Personally I don't like the recoil of the .40 in the subcompacts, I have stuck with the 9mm in those offerings. But in a full size pistol gimme a .40, 10mm or .45 any day of the week.

Eagle22
07-31-2010, 08:29
I have a G22 and G27. Shoot them both very well. my G27 is my daily CCW. I am happy with them.

Eagle22
07-31-2010, 09:07
Have you seen this vid?
http://www.kiesler.com/videodetail.aspx?id=1534 (http://www.kiesler.com/videodetail.aspx?id=1534)

This video is a LE ammo test vid sent to me from a friend on here. Shows the Speer Gold dot duty ammo vs the Federal Tactical HST... 9 vs 40 vs 45 IMHO<!-- / message -->

You guys notice the difference in wound cavity size in the gel? Plus the testers did not measure the wound cavity gel size from each test shot ?

Many of those test shots had very good or deep penetration and good round wt retained. But it showed that the wound cavity was different or larger in one round in particular.

Blitzer
07-31-2010, 09:12
Can anyone give a a good reason why the .40S&W has become so unpopular?

It used to be so popular and now there is a lot of negative feedback on it.

I think it is partly because the Clinton Gun Ban is over and people can get higher capacity in a 9mm.

Also 9mm are more effective now than they were 10+ years ago.

Any other ideas?

Maybe ammo cost?

I don't think it is so much the .40 being bad as the 9mm has gotten better.

It is neutered 10mm?:whistling:

DRT
07-31-2010, 09:29
You guys notice the difference in wound cavity size in the gel? Plus the testers did not measure the wound cavity gel size from each test shot ?

Many of those test shots had very good or deep penetration and good round wt retained. But it showed that the wound cavity was different or larger in one round in particular.

Their FBI heavy clothing doesn't look very heavy to me. No wonder IWBA came up with their own protocol/test spec.

cmspeedy
07-31-2010, 10:41
What was scary was the bullet disintegration that occurred several times in that video. I understand that the ballistic tip is designed to not overpenetrate, but I can think of PLENTY of scenarios where shooting through whatever the bad guy is hiding behind are very important.

The .40 had bigger wound cavities than the 9mm - that was obvious. Between the .40 and .45 I could not see much of a difference. I wish they would have tested the 9mm 147g HST and the .40 180g HST as they are similar in SD to a 230g .45ACP

Now the .223 rounds left HUGE wound cavities, just as one would expect from a high velocity rifle round.

Good video.

Glockbuster
07-31-2010, 11:38
deleted, found it

stopatrain
07-31-2010, 11:44
Almost as good as a .45 but carries more rounds.

rome2240sw
07-31-2010, 15:02
What was scary was the bullet disintegration that occurred several times in that video. I understand that the ballistic tip is designed to not overpenetrate, but I can think of PLENTY of scenarios where shooting through whatever the bad guy is hiding behind are very important.

The .40 had bigger wound cavities than the 9mm - that was obvious. Between the .40 and .45 I could not see much of a difference. I wish they would have tested the 9mm 147g HST and the .40 180g HST as they are similar in SD to a 230g .45ACP

Now the .223 rounds left HUGE wound cavities, just as one would expect from a high velocity rifle round.

Good video.

yeah, every round i seen that they shot through the glass looked really beat. I love the 40 and I too would have wanted to see them try a .40 180gr HST to see how it compared to the 45. I do know those wounds in the gel from the 40 look sick. Especially the first 5 or 6 inches in the gel. Goes once again to show the 40 is a VERY potent round.

The .40 wounds comparably to the 45 with deep penetration. Also the 40 was decent when it came to weight retention. :whistling:

rome2240sw
07-31-2010, 15:06
You guys notice the difference in wound cavity size in the gel? Plus the testers did not measure the wound cavity gel size from each test shot ?

Many of those test shots had very good or deep penetration and good round wt retained. But it showed that the wound cavity was different or larger in one round in particular.

Im truely suprised that measurements of the wound cavity were'nt part of the test. I would love to see the measurements of the 45 and the .40's wound cavity.

Angry Fist
07-31-2010, 15:16
Nothing wrong with the Fotay... it was my first handgun caliber. Anyone who thinks it is not as good as anything should take 2 to the chest to reconsider... just like .380 haters :whistling:

9mm and .45 have been dropping people dead for over a hundred years. .40 is new. Give it time to prove itself. Ammo drought? All we had was .40, and when I got a Glock, I wanted to get the 10-40 conversion barrel because its cheaper to shoot. It's also what I qualified with, as I outshot all the other guys with 9's and .45's.

collim1
08-01-2010, 19:57
I recently traded my G23 for a G26 for CCW duty. With the lighter and smaller gun I wanted the reduced recoil of the 9mm.

I carry a .40 226 on Duty because it is required. If I could I would carry a 9mm due to the reduced recoil.

I tend to shoot better with less recoil.

Its all personal preference I feel safe with 9mm, .40, .45 or .38spl+p for self defense.

ROGER4314
08-01-2010, 20:35
I shoot .45 and 9mm. When I shoot the big gun and try to retrieve my brass, I always get skunked on 40 brass. There is a lot of it laying around on our range and that says you might be wrong on the low popularity of the guns.

For me, the 40 always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. It never made sense to me when I had 9mm and 45 available.

Flash

luv2brode
08-01-2010, 20:44
i use a 40 currently for duty, but next time i qual im going to 9mm.
i wont get rid of the 40 in case i go some where its required but i dont feel undergunned with the 9 with todays ballistics

at_liberty
08-02-2010, 07:44
Can anyone give a a good reason why the .40S&W has become so unpopular?

What is your basis for thinking of the .40 SW as "unpopular"?

Truisms or factoids in one segment of the gun owning population could be invalid in another. For example, military background and LE people have been trained to know more about guns and how to use them than the average Joe or Jane Public. When free to choose a personal weapon, their choices could be different and for more technical reasons.

I believe many new shooters are basing their interest on movies and video games and wind up with little guns in minor calibers, creating extreme shortages and high prices in the ammo that goes with those guns. It is partly a function of how younger people dress, not at all conducive to concealment except for pocket guns. The fact is that smaller guns are either smaller calibers or are so snappy that few really like shooting them except when they have to. When you read complaints about the recoil of the 9mm, you know that the world is stood on its head, that these are not real shooters but definitely a part of the gun market.

DWARREN123
08-02-2010, 08:07
Who says?

Eagle22
08-02-2010, 09:40
Looks like you guys are seeing what I saw to the .40 and .45 wound cavities in the gel.

bigdollars
08-02-2010, 10:02
What is your basis for thinking of the .40 SW as "unpopular"?

Truisms or factoids in one segment of the gun owning population could be invalid in another. For example, military background and LE people have been trained to know more about guns and how to use them than the average Joe or Jane Public. When free to choose a personal weapon, their choices could be different and for more technical reasons.

I believe many new shooters are basing their interest on movies and video games and wind up with little guns in minor calibers, creating extreme shortages and high prices in the ammo that goes with those guns. It is partly a function of how younger people dress, not at all conducive to concealment except for pocket guns. The fact is that smaller guns are either smaller calibers or are so snappy that few really like shooting them except when they have to. When you read complaints about the recoil of the 9mm, you know that the world is stood on its head, that these are not real shooters but definitely a part of the gun market.

I have always seen the .40 as the ultimate round for personel defense but I have noticed a lot of law enforcement agencies have been going back to the 9mm. I figured it was budgetary reasons.

A lot of people on glock talk have negative things to say about the round. Some have gone as far as the get conversion kits and change their .40's to 9mm.

I posted this thread to find out why people who dislike the round actually dislike the round.

I use it, I plan to continue to use it. I just wanted to find out why those who do not like, dislike it.

cowboy1964
08-02-2010, 11:03
I also like what the 40 can do over the 9mm.

The .40:

- expands a little larger
- costs more
- recoils more

Because of my ability to shoot 9mm better than .40 I'm sticking with 9mm for now. The fact that it's somewhat less expensive helps me practice more and that's always a good thing. I have .45ACP if I want to go larger.

cowboy1964
08-02-2010, 11:04
I have always seen the .40 as the ultimate round for personel defense but I have noticed a lot of law enforcement agencies have been going back to the 9mm. I figured it was budgetary reasons.

I really haven't seen agencies switch from .40 to something else, certainly not back to 9mm. Do you have any examples?

However, those are are switching FROM 9mm seem to be going to .357SIG, .45ACP, or .45GAP more often than to .40 these days.

kgain673
08-02-2010, 12:05
I think it is simply two factors, ammo price, and the fact that 40 cal. handguns have a sharp recoil. A coworker who has just got into firearms shot my G27 at the range and hated the recoil, I told learn how to hold the firearm right and it will not bother you. He then went out and bought a G19.

bigdollars
08-02-2010, 13:55
I live in an area where there are many small towns all grouped together. The nearest city is 3 towns over from me. all the towns switched back to 9mm. I figured it was budget reasons. larger cities and big agencies don't really have budget issues like small towns do so they can go with more costly guns and ammo i guess.

My town has the M&P 9mm.

They used to have the SW99 in .40.

rome2240sw
08-02-2010, 16:51
I have always seen the .40 as the ultimate round for personel defense but I have noticed a lot of law enforcement agencies have been going back to the 9mm. I figured it was budgetary reasons.

A lot of people on glock talk have negative things to say about the round. Some have gone as far as the get conversion kits and change their .40's to 9mm.

I posted this thread to find out why people who dislike the round actually dislike the round.

I use it, I plan to continue to use it. I just wanted to find out why those who do not like, dislike it.

I love my glock .40. Thats my gen2 g22 in my pic. But i understood what you meant from the start. There are so many people that dislike the 40 because of who knows what reasons. I love it and will continue to shoot it.

Like i stated the 40 does more than the 9mm can do with deep penetration. The wound channel is close to that of a 45 as well as your able to carry more rounds.

Brucev
08-02-2010, 17:22
Hum... .40 S&W offers plenty of bullet weight, plenty of velocity, plenty of penetration and expansion, plenty of capacity in a G-22. Can't think of anything it doesn't do very well indeed. If someone prefers a 9mm, fine. I've always like a good 9mm pistol. If someone prefers a .45 ACP, fine. I have a Springfield 1911 Mil-Spec in .45 ACP that I very much enjoy. But when it comes to HD, etc., I prefer the .40 S&W in a G-22.

PghJim
08-02-2010, 22:05
I do not see the 40 as losing popularity. It is a very good round and I own a G23. However, I carry 357sig in a G32 because the recoil is less and I can shoot better and faster with it than the 40. I do not like caliber wars, and in reality I think over 70% of people shot with a handgun survive, so it is not as effective as we would like to think. With today's ammo I would go with what fits you best. My wife carries a G19 with Ranger T 127 +p+ ammo and I think that is just fine because she handles it better than other calibers and hitting is most important.

syr74
08-02-2010, 23:27
Hum... .40 S&W offers plenty of bullet weight, plenty of velocity, plenty of penetration and expansion, plenty of capacity in a G-22. Can't think of anything it doesn't do very well indeed. If someone prefers a 9mm, fine. I've always like a good 9mm pistol. If someone prefers a .45 ACP, fine. I have a Springfield 1911 Mil-Spec in .45 ACP that I very much enjoy. But when it comes to HD, etc., I prefer the .40 S&W in a G-22.

I largely agree but for one caveat. The .40 S&W cartridge has one glaring shortcoming given how new the design itself is, an unforgivably thin case well given the pressures the round generates even in some of the hotter factory loadings. Of late this has had me wondering if the victory in the .40 S&W versus .41 Action Express war didn't go to the inferior competitor, because the truth is that the .41 AE doesn't have that same shortcoming. Just my two cents.

legion3
08-03-2010, 18:51
I am not sure about the "popularity" as such but I do notice that a lot of 40 cal handguns are available in the used gun sections of most stores I frequent and at gunshows.

While its true that 9mm's and 45ACP's also are in such cases, they don't seem to linger long, while the 40's tend to take longer to sell even at real decent prices.

Cost of ammo or perhaps the recoil?

syr74
08-03-2010, 23:10
I am not sure about the "popularity" as such but I do notice that a lot of 40 cal handguns are available in the used gun sections of most stores I frequent and at gunshows.

While its true that 9mm's and 45ACP's also are in such cases, they don't seem to linger long, while the 40's tend to take longer to sell even at real decent prices.

Cost of ammo or perhaps the recoil?

Good point. Now that you mention it 40 owners in general don't seem to feel the kind of passion for the round you find with so many 9mm Para and 45 ACp owners. Over the course of the last three weeks almost every truly 'good' used semi-auto deal I have stumbled across was in fact for a gun chambered for 40 S&W or 357 Sig.

I'm not saying there are no 40 devotees, but given my experience I tend to agree that it isn't the gun world 'rock star' the 45 ACP and 9mm are, and it arguably doesn't even have the niche groups of fanatics I have seen with rounds like the 454 Casull and 10mm Auto.

Than again, that probably makes this a great round for the open-minded enthusiast since, in my experience, that lack of relative fandom does make things surrounding this round surprisingly affordable.

at_liberty
08-04-2010, 06:18
Good point. Now that you mention it 40 owners in general don't seem to feel the kind of passion for the round you find with so many 9mm Para and 45 ACp owners. Over the course of the last three weeks almost every truly 'good' used semi-auto deal I have stumbled across was in fact for a gun chambered for 40 S&W or 357 Sig.

I'm not saying there are no 40 devotees, but given my experience I tend to agree that it isn't the gun world 'rock star' the 45 ACP and 9mm are, and it arguably doesn't even have the niche groups of fanatics I have seen with rounds like the 454 Casull and 10mm Auto.

Than again, that probably makes this a great round for the open-minded enthusiast since, in my experience, that lack of relative fandom does make things surrounding this round surprisingly affordable.

Certainly from a reloading standpoint .40 S&W and 9 mm are both problematic, requiring brass sorting and resizing not required for the .45 ACP. I wonder if some guns get set aside because it is too much more trouble to make ammo for them. Rather than move up in cost to the .45, the direction would probably be to the 9 mm, which also presents a better way to cope with "lost brass" matches. For example, Sellier & Bellot ammo is a reloading challenge because of quirky brass, pretty much throwaways. Since the ammo is often on sale it becomes the candidate for when a shooter will not be able to retrieve his brass. Happily, the case heads are painted red, so it is easy to know what NOT to pick up (or to throw back) when possible.

Personally, I like a .40 for carry, following the rule that the caliber has to start with a "4". The selection of suitable guns is better than in .45, but recently the .45 has been offered in most designs, unfortunately at the same time that ammo and cost availability have become so problematic in .45 ACP. In these lighter weight, poly frame guns, the .45 ACP is even more rude to shoot that a .40. I think it all has to do with how much mass the gun has in a particular caliber. If most of the .40 SW guns were developed on a 9 mm platform, often as lightweight and short-barreled as possible, yeah, they will be known as nasty little suckers.

English
08-04-2010, 06:45
......

Personally, I like a .40 for carry, following the rule that the caliber has to start with a "4". The selection of suitable guns is better than in .45, but recently the .45 has been offered in most designs, unfortunately at the same time that ammo and cost availability have become so problematic in .45 ACP. In these lighter weight, poly frame guns, the .45 ACP is even more rude to shoot that a .40. I think it all has to do with how much mass the gun has in a particular caliber. If most of the .40 SW guns were developed on a 9 mm platform, often as lightweight and short-barreled as possible, yeah, they will be known as nasty little suckers.

I too would prefer something more effective than the 9mm for self defence and I am sure the problem s for many people with the .40S&W in a 9mm size and weight pistol is the felt recoil and the cost of factory ammunition.

The crucial factor here is that if you carry for self defense you want a light and easy to carry pistol with as much "power" as possible. That is not a description for a nice to shoot range pistol but a nice to shoot range pistol is not a good self defense pistol. There is only one good answer to this and that is to do most practice with a 9mm but carry a .40S&W (or 357SIG). This can be done with two matching pistols of different calibers or with a conversion barrel and magazine.

The .45ACP is easier to reload because it is a much lower pressure cartridge than 9 or .40 but as a self defense pistol it has too much against it. The pistols are bigger and heavier and so less easy to carry, they hold fewer rounds, and their terminal effectiveness are equalled by the .40S&W and beaten by the 357SIG. Other than for sentimental reasons it is hard to justify the .45 for self defense. If you are going to accept that size and weight the 10mm is an outstandingly better choice with more rounds carried and much higher terminal effectiveness. In other words, the .40S&W is a superior choice for self defense regardless of popularity.

English

txgunguy
08-07-2010, 16:35
The 40 has got to be one of the most popular LEA rounds & many new shooters will buy what the local LEO carry. Then there are states like Kalif that say only 10rds. G19 or G23, might as well have the bigger holes.

If it came down to only 10 rounds I would carry a bigger caliber as well.

SIGShooter
08-07-2010, 17:17
I don't know about anyone else…but 40 S&W definitely isn't unpopular with me.

As a matter of fact, I'm almost done completing my 40 family.

I should never have left the 40 in the first place.

Chonny
08-08-2010, 06:41
The .40 peaked out years ago. It's not losing popularity as much as the 9mm and .45 both are gaining popularity.

The .40 really has no clear cut advantage. The only thing its got going for it is a whole bunch of compromise, its biggest advantage is a slight performance increase over a 9mm.

English
08-08-2010, 08:22
The .40 peaked out years ago. It's not losing popularity as much as the 9mm and .45 both are gaining popularity.

The .40 really has no clear cut advantage. The only thing its got going for it is a whole bunch of compromise, its biggest advantage is a slight performance increase over a 9mm.

I suppose it is possible that the 9mm is gaining popularity amongst those that fail to understand why the .40S&W is so much better, and there are many very competent people amongst them. It is also possible that the .45, whether ACP of GAP, is gaining popularity for sentimental reasons that fail to understand the disadvantages of the .45, and there are many very competent people there too.

All engineering solutions are compromises, but the .40S&W has a clear cut power advantage over the 9mm in the same medium size and weight pistols at the cost of only about two rounds. In the other direction it equals the power of the .45 except for .45ACP +P+ versions, but gains a few rounds. The 357SIG is slightly better still, but the .40S&W beats both 9mm and .45ACP/GAP.

English

at_liberty
08-08-2010, 08:24
The .40 peaked out years ago. It's not losing popularity as much as the 9mm and .45 both are gaining popularity.

The .40 really has no clear cut advantage. The only thing its got going for it is a whole bunch of compromise, its biggest advantage is a slight performance increase over a 9mm.

It is a smaller, lighter weight gun than a typical .45, and thus its reputation as being snappy to shoot.

Dogguy
08-08-2010, 09:47
Around here, the LEAs all have .40s. You go to the range and the brass scattered around is mostly .40. Go into most of the gun shops and they have more .40 caliber in everything than 9mm--not many .45s at all unless you go to the nearby custom shop. People around here love the .40 so I don't see it as being unpopular at all.

This from a guy who never has been drawn to the .40 and who only owns 9mm and .45 calibers.

It could be a regional/local phenomenon. Some guns are more popular in some areas than in others.

happyguy
08-08-2010, 10:09
Can anyone give a a good reason why the .40S&W has become so unpopular?


With who?

My smaller carry guns are 9's and the larger ones are .40.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

syr74
08-08-2010, 18:04
The .40 peaked out years ago. It's not losing popularity as much as the 9mm and .45 both are gaining popularity.

The .40 really has no clear cut advantage. The only thing its got going for it is a whole bunch of compromise, its biggest advantage is a slight performance increase over a 9mm.

I have actually found myself wondering if the drive to crank .45 ACP like energy out of the .40 S&W, theoretically improving that round in the process, hasn't actually undone the .40 S&W just a bit in the long term.

Case in point. The .40 S&W has a maximum SAAMI pressure of 35000 psi. Why? That is on par with the max SAAMI pressure rating for the 9mm Para, which says a lot given the difference in size between the two cartridges, and to be blunt the .40S&W doesn't need to run that kind of pressure in order to be effective at what it was designed to do and do it very well.

Sadly, this wouldn't matter much but for the fact that, when you establish a maximum SAAMi pressure rating, companies inevitably seem to load every other offering the make for the maximum pressure rating or something very close to it whether doing so makes sense or not.

All that extra pressure effectively does is try to make a .45 ACP out of a cartridge that is best served not trying to be a .45 ACP in the first place, and in the process it...

a: .....decreases the useful life of the brass if you roll your own
b: .....greatly increases the odds of a kb as we have seen
c: .....prematurely beats the heck out of any gun chambered for it
d: .....produces recoil out of proportion relative to what one would expect

I love a powerful cartridge as much as the next guy, but 'Magnum syndrome' is getting out of hand, and .40 S&W is on the list of cartridges that I believe that phenomenon has actually hindered in the long term.

Personally I am certain that I would like both .40 S&W and 10mm Auto much more if companies and enthusiasts would end the drive to see what it takes to load them until something pops.

I am truly beginning to wonder if a major firearms manufacturer couldn't manage a bit of a coup here if they rehashed the old .41 AE a bit increasing case strength and decreasing max SAAMI pressure just a bit in the process developing a cartridge that is a good deal more like what .40 S&W arguably should have been in the first place.

Just my two cents.

at_liberty
08-08-2010, 18:39
I am truly beginning to wonder if a major firearms manufacturer couldn't manage a bit of a coup here if they rehashed the old .41 AE a bit increasing case strength and decreasing max SAAMI pressure just a bit in the process developing a cartridge that is a good deal more like what .40 S&W arguably should have been in the first place.

Just my two cents.

The .41 AE subject has repeatedly hijacked other .40 S&W threads. Let's not go there.

It is news to me that ammo companies are all trying to max out .40 S&W cartridges. I find nothing unusual in a range of ammo purchases, most selected for economy in practice ammo. In my reloading I can very easily create a round that is unmistakably more potent than what I normally shoot in boxed ammo, and I am not very far into the range of suggested loads for it. I would say the more common boxed ammo is pretty conservative. If I light up one of my commercial defensive rounds, I certainly notice the difference but wouldn't say it is dramatic or scary.

syr74
08-08-2010, 19:25
The .41 AE subject has repeatedly hijacked other .40 S&W threads. Let's not go there.

I can appreciate that. That said, I will add that the fact that this keeps coming up might indicate more than a few folks think the .40 concept has been let down as I do.

It is news to me that ammo companies are all trying to max out .40 S&W cartridges. I find nothing unusual in a range of ammo purchases, most selected for economy in practice ammo. In my reloading I can very easily create a round that is unmistakably more potent than what I normally shoot in boxed ammo, and I am not very far into the range of suggested loads for it. I would say the more common boxed ammo is pretty conservative. If I light up one of my commercial defensive rounds, I certainly notice the difference but wouldn't say it is dramatic or scary.To be blunt, and I'm not trying to offend, what I'm reading here sounds a bit like Magnum syndrome lite. At this stage we have seen enough kb's with factory ammo to tell me that max SAAMI pressure is very arguably a bit optimistic.

Somebody will no doubt chime in and state that reloads are an issue, etc, etc. Still, even if we throw a good portion of the burden on the shoulders of reloads .40 and .357 are very obviously more prone to case ruptures under normally encountered conditions, even hot reloads, than say .45 ACP or 9mm Para. The sheer volume of case rupture issues, and not just with Glocks now, leads us to that conclusion.

Given the litigation-happy society we live in, that is bad to put it mildly. Throw in the popularity of the .40 S&W round among law enforcement circles and, potentially, you have the makings for a disaster if the wrong political forces get hold of this situation and blow it out of proportion.

I can see the headlines now. "Irresponsible gun industry manufactures cartridge that maims brave law enforcement officers. Manufacturers have been aware of the problem for years and did next to nothing, while the organization that regulates such things stood by complicit knowingly allowing dangerously over-pressure cartridges to be manufactured without objection"

Blown out of proportion? Yep. Possible and even plausible? You bet your happy backside, all the while were in here debating what the meaning of the term 'hot cartridge' actually is. The fact that we can run a spicier than factory, home-rolled .40 through our own firearm without blowing into the next zip code does not mean SAAMI specs are reasonable.

I like .40, and in the right gun I have no qualms with the cartridge at all, but .40 S&W is absolutely major, gun rights changing litigation waiting to happen and, my take on the subject, is that I would prefer not to deliver anything to the anti-gunnies on a golden platter.

Throw that in with the other issues noted above and, yeah, I think .40 could have been executed better in some respects.

Chonny
08-08-2010, 23:10
I think it will remain in the top three most popular auto cartridges for quite a while sitting beside the 9mm and the .45.

Seems like people really like it or either avoid it completely. I prefer other things.

thegriz18
08-08-2010, 23:25
I prefer the 40 over the 9mm for SD work. Granted the 9 has come a long way. However, it is hard to find a bad 40 round. IMO, 9mm SD ammo isn't as consistent as 40 ammo in performance. I may be skewed though since I am a 40 supporter. All things being equal I'd rather launch a 165 grain bullet than a 124 grain bullet. Especially since the velocity of each round, even +P 124, is nearly identical, or very close. With the right load the 40 gives you 9mm velocity with a heavier, slightly bigger bullet.

I think the 40 will remain popular for a while. IMO the 40 edges out the 45 in some situations. I think the 40 is a great ''do everything'' round. I think a lot of other people think the same way and that will keep the round popular in the future.

chewybaca67
08-08-2010, 23:32
Funny, during the ammo drought of '09, the only ammo that was easy to find was .40 S&W. Walmart would be sold out of everything else, but have plenty of .40.

Which is exactly why I like shootin' different calibers. If one caliber is dried up, they'll be other options. There's plenty of 9mm brass lying around though. I'm loadin' up a couple of K now.

SDGlock23
08-09-2010, 11:29
The .40 is a great cartridge. It has, in my honest opinion, the best collection of firepower and capacity of any other popular offering. Where is the compromise? It has 9mm like capacity with .45 ACP (and better) performance. One can reload and easily, and safely I might add, top 650 ft-lbs out of a 4" G23 using 155/165gr bullets, and over 700 using lighter bullets.

The .41 AE has nothing on the .40 S&W, so rehashing the .41 AE isn't a too bright of an idea.

Trigger Finger
08-09-2010, 17:23
I went with the .40 because I saw in simple terms as a cut down 10mm and it seems like a good "give and take" between the 9mm and the 45acp.

The reason I asked the question is because many law enforcement agencies are giving up the G22 .40 and going with the 9mm M&P.

also because there is so much negative feedback on this forum.

I at one time thought the .40 was going to be the end of the 9mm.

Now i see the 9mm making a huge come back.

Like I said earlier I think it is because of capacity, cost, and the fact that the 9mm is better now than it was a decade or so ago.

I think I should have asked the question differently.

I should have said, "For those who do not like the .40S&W, Please tell us why?"

Giving up the .40 and going with the 9mm!!!!!!!
I never heard of that. What agencies are you referring to?
Transitioning from one caliber to another is not an easy task for any agency that have more than 100 officers!
But to charge to a weaker caliber does not make sense. The 9mm is better than ever before with modern ammo but it is still not as good as the .40. Check the numbers. Bigger hole and more energy!!
And I think that the 40 advantage is more than slight.

IndyGunFreak
08-09-2010, 21:47
Giving up the .40 and going with the 9mm!!!!!!!
I never heard of that. What agencies are you referring to?
Transitioning from one caliber to another is not an easy task for any agency that have more than 100 officers!
But to charge to a weaker caliber does not make sense. The 9mm is better than ever before with modern ammo but it is still not as good as the .40. Check the numbers. Bigger hole and more energy!!
And I think that the 40 advantage is more than slight.

I believe the Indiana State Police did, but it was because of problems w/ their Glock 22's, and Glock swapped them for 17's.

IGF

bigdollars
08-09-2010, 22:15
Giving up the .40 and going with the 9mm!!!!!!!
I never heard of that. What agencies are you referring to?
Transitioning from one caliber to another is not an easy task for any agency that have more than 100 officers!
But to charge to a weaker caliber does not make sense. The 9mm is better than ever before with modern ammo but it is still not as good as the .40. Check the numbers. Bigger hole and more energy!!
And I think that the 40 advantage is more than slight.

small towns in the area where i live. there are about 6 or 7 of them. they all have between 20 and 35 officers each. i believe they are doing it for budget reasons.

there are a lot of people on this site that are very negative towards the .40. i was looking for reasons why they feel that way.

Trigger Finger
08-09-2010, 23:24
small towns in the area where i live. there are about 6 or 7 of them. they all have between 20 and 35 officers each. i believe they are doing it for budget reasons.

there are a lot of people on this site that are very negative towards the .40. i was looking for reasons why they feel that way.


Even doing it for budget reasons is hard to believe. But you brought up the agencies going back to the 9mm and leaving the 40, which I still have trouble understanding.

I like the 40 and think it is a great caliber. Most people that are negative toward the 40 are in bed with the 10mm or 45 crowd and think of it as a watered down 10.

chewybaca67
08-09-2010, 23:44
Even doing it for budget reasons is hard to believe. But you brought up the agencies going back to the 9mm and leaving the 40, which I still have trouble understanding.

I like the 40 and think it is a great caliber. Most people that are negative toward the 40 are in bed with the 10mm or 45 crowd and think of it as a watered down 10.

Me too. Even my girlfriend sez she can't ever go back to her ex, cuz bigger IS better. :supergrin:

Daryl in Az
08-11-2010, 14:15
The .40 peaked out years ago. It's not losing popularity as much as the 9mm and .45 both are gaining popularity.

The .40 really has no clear cut advantage. The only thing its got going for it is a whole bunch of compromise, its biggest advantage is a slight performance increase over a 9mm.

I think maybe you should define "no clear cut advantage", and while you're at it, perhaps "Compromise", and "slight performance increase".

Depending on which "unit of measure" one uses (Energy, Momentum, or Taylor Knock Out (or, KO)), the .40 measures up to be more than slightly better than the 9mm. In fact, it measure up quite well against the .45 ACP, and is more powerful than the .45 ACP in some loads, depending on the unit of measure.

I did this on another board, but I'm going to do it again here from scratch. I'll simply take the highest velocity offered at the same source for each given weight bullet for each cartridge. Then I'll take each one, and run it through an energy/momentum/KO calculator so that they're easy to compare.

Sound interesting? It is, and the results might surprise you.

Before I start, I'll say up front that these are NOT the only loads out there. Some companies undoubtedly load hotter loads for any of these cartridges. This is just a basic comparison to give an idea of what's real, and what's not.

If one wishes, they can chrono their own pet load, and they can post the bullet weight, velocity, energy, momentum, and KO.

I'll even share a link to the calculator, although they're easy enough to find with a search. Click Here (http://www.handloads.com/calc/quick.asp)


Ok, lets start with the 9mm.
124/125 grain bullet
1169 fps/379 fpe/momentum 20/KO 7
147 grain bullet
1004 fps/328 fpe/momentum 21/KO 7

.357 Sig
124/125 grain bullet
1438 fps/569 fpe/momentum 25/KO 9
147 grain bullet
1260 fps/518 fpe/momentum 26/KO 9

.40 S&W
135 grain bullet
1434 fps/616 fpe/momentum 27/KO 11
155 graom bullet
1283 fps/566 fpe/momentum 28/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1159 fps/536 fpe/momentum 29/KO 11

.45 ACP
155 grain bullet
1135 fps/443 fpe/momentum 25/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1047 fps/438 fpe/momentum 26/KO 12
230 grain bullet
939 fps/450 fpe/momentum 30/KO 13

For loading data info, I used http://hodgdon.com

Their web data page is used by hodgdon, IMR, and Winchester as a loading data source. If in doubt, the info is easily checked with a few clicks.

Looking at the data, and keeping in mind that this is just mathmatical figures, it looks to me like a person would have to push a 9mm to .357 sig levels before the .40 would have only a "slight performance increase".

That's not to say that any of these can't, or don't make a great carry/self-defense cartridge. They're all fine cartridges in their own right, each perhaps with their own advantage, but lets keep the performance arguements honest, ok?

fastbolt
08-11-2010, 14:37
A couple other thoughts I'll offer in this thread ...

From my own experience as a LE firearms instructor & armorer, I've seen more agencies adopt and/or approve weapons chambered in .40 S&W than those who have done so for 9mm weapons in the last several years. For whatever reason, the .40 S&W is still likely the predominant caliber gaining favor with agency purchasers. Maybe more slowly because of dwindling monies for things like duty weapons, but it still seems to favor the .40 S&W guns for duty holsters.

Is it the primary choice of individual officers? Who could say with any certainty aside from geographical considerations?

As I mentioned in an earlier posting, the local Glock LE dealer has recently said individual officer sales reflect that the 9mm models have clearly surpassed the .40 & .45 models when it comes to folks spending their own money. I can think of a couple of fairly large agencies in the several counties serviced by this dealer who still issue G17's, but so many more issue the G22.

Another thought I'll mention invokes the experience of a working cop who is also a trainer for one of the major firearms companies (armorer instructor). He works back East. When I was attending an armorer class he was teaching, and the subject of duty calibers came up, I asked him what caliber preference, if any, existed back where he worked. He said that the .40 S&W had replaced the .45 ACP for some users. Apparently it was because of how some shootings seemed to demonstrate that some .40 S&W loads penetrated and expanded more consistently in heavy winter clothing conditions better than some of the shootings in which .45's were used. We didn't get involved in discussing what brands of ammunition might have been involved, for reason of moving the class along, and it was just a casual reference to his locality in the state where he had worked for many years. It was an interesting observation, though.

Angry Fist
08-11-2010, 17:42
Most people that are negative toward the 40 are in bed with the 10mm or 45 crowd and think of it as a watered down 10.

Not me! Anything that launches something .400" @ over 1000 fps can't be all that bad... I'm sure there are tens of thousands of cops to back that... due to budget constraints, I shoot a whole lot more fotay these days. :fist:

RMTactical
08-12-2010, 00:07
I didnt know it was unpopular. Seems pretty popular to me.

I think it's popularity has died down some, but it's definitely a very popular caliber in the US.

bigdollars
08-12-2010, 00:33
I think maybe you should define "no clear cut advantage", and while you're at it, perhaps "Compromise", and "slight performance increase".

Depending on which "unit of measure" one uses (Energy, Momentum, or Taylor Knock Out (or, KO)), the .40 measures up to be more than slightly better than the 9mm. In fact, it measure up quite well against the .45 ACP, and is more powerful than the .45 ACP in some loads, depending on the unit of measure.

I did this on another board, but I'm going to do it again here from scratch. I'll simply take the highest velocity offered at the same source for each given weight bullet for each cartridge. Then I'll take each one, and run it through an energy/momentum/KO calculator so that they're easy to compare.

Sound interesting? It is, and the results might surprise you.

Before I start, I'll say up front that these are NOT the only loads out there. Some companies undoubtedly load hotter loads for any of these cartridges. This is just a basic comparison to give an idea of what's real, and what's not.

If one wishes, they can chrono their own pet load, and they can post the bullet weight, velocity, energy, momentum, and KO.

I'll even share a link to the calculator, although they're easy enough to find with a search. Click Here (http://www.handloads.com/calc/quick.asp)


Ok, lets start with the 9mm.
124/125 grain bullet
1169 fps/379 fpe/momentum 20/KO 7
147 grain bullet
1004 fps/328 fpe/momentum 21/KO 7

.357 Sig
124/125 grain bullet
1438 fps/569 fpe/momentum 25/KO 9
147 grain bullet
1260 fps/518 fpe/momentum 26/KO 9

.40 S&W
135 grain bullet
1434 fps/616 fpe/momentum 27/KO 11
155 graom bullet
1283 fps/566 fpe/momentum 28/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1159 fps/536 fpe/momentum 29/KO 11

.45 ACP
155 grain bullet
1135 fps/443 fpe/momentum 25/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1047 fps/438 fpe/momentum 26/KO 12
230 grain bullet
939 fps/450 fpe/momentum 30/KO 13

For loading data info, I used http://hodgdon.com

Their web data page is used by hodgdon, IMR, and Winchester as a loading data source. If in doubt, the info is easily checked with a few clicks.

Looking at the data, and keeping in mind that this is just mathmatical figures, it looks to me like a person would have to push a 9mm to .357 sig levels before the .40 would have only a "slight performance increase".

That's not to say that any of these can't, or don't make a great carry/self-defense cartridge. They're all fine cartridges in their own right, each perhaps with their own advantage, but lets keep the performance arguements honest, ok?


Thanks for posting those numbers. Makes me feel good about having a .40 Sig P-229

Trigger Finger
08-12-2010, 01:28
Not me! Anything that launches something .400" @ over 1000 fps can't be all that bad... I'm sure there are tens of thousands of cops to back that... due to budget constraints, I shoot a whole lot more fotay these days. :fist:

Didn't mean to upset but I said most people that are against the 40, it sounds like you are not. But there are many on other sites that are.
I think a caliber with the power of the 40 S&W in a 9mm size package is hard to beat!

kgain673
08-17-2010, 18:27
None of the nay sayers will admit it, but the only thing that is a drawback of the .40 cal is the sharp recoil compared to the 9mm and 45. You just have to spend more trigger time on a .40 platform to use the firearm well.

Chonny
08-18-2010, 01:23
Daryl that's a really good post. It didn't make me wanna go out and buy a .40 but its still a good post. I still prefer 9mm, .45, or .357/.38.

PghJim
08-18-2010, 04:35
I think maybe you should define "no clear cut advantage", and while you're at it, perhaps "Compromise", and "slight performance increase".

Depending on which "unit of measure" one uses (Energy, Momentum, or Taylor Knock Out (or, KO)), the .40 measures up to be more than slightly better than the 9mm. In fact, it measure up quite well against the .45 ACP, and is more powerful than the .45 ACP in some loads, depending on the unit of measure.

I did this on another board, but I'm going to do it again here from scratch. I'll simply take the highest velocity offered at the same source for each given weight bullet for each cartridge. Then I'll take each one, and run it through an energy/momentum/KO calculator so that they're easy to compare.

Sound interesting? It is, and the results might surprise you.

Before I start, I'll say up front that these are NOT the only loads out there. Some companies undoubtedly load hotter loads for any of these cartridges. This is just a basic comparison to give an idea of what's real, and what's not.

If one wishes, they can chrono their own pet load, and they can post the bullet weight, velocity, energy, momentum, and KO.

I'll even share a link to the calculator, although they're easy enough to find with a search. Click Here (http://www.handloads.com/calc/quick.asp)


Ok, lets start with the 9mm.
124/125 grain bullet
1169 fps/379 fpe/momentum 20/KO 7
147 grain bullet
1004 fps/328 fpe/momentum 21/KO 7

.357 Sig
124/125 grain bullet
1438 fps/569 fpe/momentum 25/KO 9
147 grain bullet
1260 fps/518 fpe/momentum 26/KO 9

.40 S&W
135 grain bullet
1434 fps/616 fpe/momentum 27/KO 11
155 graom bullet
1283 fps/566 fpe/momentum 28/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1159 fps/536 fpe/momentum 29/KO 11

.45 ACP
155 grain bullet
1135 fps/443 fpe/momentum 25/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1047 fps/438 fpe/momentum 26/KO 12
230 grain bullet
939 fps/450 fpe/momentum 30/KO 13

For loading data info, I used http://hodgdon.com

Their web data page is used by hodgdon, IMR, and Winchester as a loading data source. If in doubt, the info is easily checked with a few clicks.

Looking at the data, and keeping in mind that this is just mathmatical figures, it looks to me like a person would have to push a 9mm to .357 sig levels before the .40 would have only a "slight performance increase".

That's not to say that any of these can't, or don't make a great carry/self-defense cartridge. They're all fine cartridges in their own right, each perhaps with their own advantage, but lets keep the performance arguements honest, ok?

I generally do not get involoved in these, but where is there a factory 40 135gr. doing 1,434fps or a 155 gr doing 1,283fps? I realize these are the top loads listed for Longshot, but very much unachievable in a 4" barrel. I have tried and not even got close. Aside from DT, which is highly exagerated, Corbon rates their 135 gr 40 at 1,325 and that is hard to reach. However, I have factory 357 sig loads of 125gr. doing over 1,450 fps. All factory 40 S&W loads except Buffalo Bores 40+p do under 1,200 fps in a 4" barrel. I have tried them all and Speer comes the closest.

Bullets for 9's and 45's have gotten better and out of the 49 state police agencies, 10 now use the 357 sig, which places it 2nd behind the 40 S&W. I have carried a 40 G23 for many years, but now carry a G32 with a Gold Dot traveling over 1,450fps. My job selling supplies to LE (not guns or ammo), has allowed me to talk to many officers and from Virginia to Texas Dept. of Safety, I have heard no complaints about the 357 Sig. Most of the stories, are just that, stories with no statistical significance, but you get a good feel for what the attitude is. The 147gr 9mm is the one I hear the most complaints about, even in San Diego where they are susposed to love it. One officer there told me it took 7 hits of the 147 gr load to get a pit bull to lie down, not die, but lie down. Many like the 40 S&W, but some would like to use a lighter bullet than the 180gr. I visit the border patrol occasionally and they use the regular 40 Ranger 155gr. Some say they would like to use the 135gr at over 1,300fps, but the pricing is too high over the Winchester offer. Of course they do not generally shoot through vehicles.


Momentum means there is less recoil if the number is lower, and that is a good thing. I would also read up on Taylor KO rating, it is very subjective and favors very heavy bullets. I think it has little relavence once you get down past a water buffalo.

Glockbuster
08-18-2010, 07:17
I believe Daryl's table could have some hotter comparable loads in +p 9 mm, at over 1200 fps for the 124 gr. bullet.

Taking Speer's data for personal protection rounds, you find for my favorite 9 mm, 357 sig, and .40 sw loads the following:

9 mm 124 gr. + P--- 1220 fps
357 sig 125 gr. --- 1350 fps
.40 sw 155 gr. --- 1200 fps

I have chronoed the loads and 9 mm and .40 have a hard time coming close to the values, while 357 sig is most consistent.

But the true statement remains that any edge is a SLIGHT edge of one over the other. A recent thread in the snubie forum asked if one felt undergunned with a 5 shot J frame snubie loaded with 38 special +p's. That's about half the performance of the aforementioned rounds and people were content and did not feel undergunned.

English
08-18-2010, 09:56
I believe Daryl's table could have some hotter comparable loads in +p 9 mm, at over 1200 fps for the 124 gr. bullet.

Taking Speer's data for personal protection rounds, you find for my favorite 9 mm, 357 sig, and .40 sw loads the following:

9 mm 124 gr. + P--- 1220 fps
357 sig 125 gr. --- 1350 fps
.40 sw 155 gr. --- 1200 fps

I have chronoed the loads and 9 mm and .40 have a hard time coming close to the values, while 357 sig is most consistent.

But the true statement remains that any edge is a SLIGHT edge of one over the other. A recent thread in the snubie forum asked if one felt undergunned with a 5 shot J frame snubie loaded with 38 special +p's. That's about half the performance of the aforementioned rounds and people were content and did not feel undergunned.

I find your post and the posts of PghJim and Daryl in Az useful and informative, but I have to take issue with your last post. it matters little whether people carrying a particular choice of weapon and load are content or feel undergunned or not. All that matters is the performance on the day they are needed. By the nature of the future, that is unknowable, but on the day it will be real.

English

Glockbuster
08-18-2010, 10:23
I cannot disagree with you, true indeed. A SLIGHT edge is still an edge and sometimes you need all the help you can get.

PghJim
08-18-2010, 17:05
I will tell you what the older officers have told me in various places. Fatal shots are rare, more than 80% of the people shot with a handgun survive. What the older guys missed from their 357 magnums, at least until the 357 Sig, was that instant reaction of the person being shot. Strong enough that he stumbles. They tell me that if a person knows he has been shot, and we are not talking about crack heads or severe mental desease, 90% of the time the situation switches to favor LE.

There was a story about five years ago about a shooting in a major Indiana county, where two criminals were trading gun fire in an big abandon building with two officers. The officers, just wanted to hang on until backup arrived, but one of the officers had a pretty good frontal shot and took it with his G22 and 180gr bullet. There was no visible effect on the person and he kept firing for another 5 or more seconds, then collapsed dead. The officer had severely damaged the heart, but the criminal was able to keep firing for a while. Every officer in the county was down. They were glad their brother officers were not shot, but as one officer put it, "you cannot have a better shot, unless you hit the head and the guy kept firing."

Although, I never met him, I was told about an officer that was hit with a 135 grain 40 traveling at around 1,300fps. Fortunately it only knicked a few things at the bottom and below the lungs, but the officer was out of the fight for more than a few seconds. He felt as if he was punched and although temporary stretch cavities may have little to do with lethality, it was enough to daze the officer. They told me his sides were bruised up and down both sides of his body from the TSC.

My point to this rambling is that the best I can hope for is to cause enough energy transfer so that the bad guy knows he has been hit and it throws him off of his game plan giving me time to shoot more, take cover or get the heck out of there.

Daryl in Az
08-18-2010, 18:51
But the true statement remains that any edge is a SLIGHT edge of one over the other. A recent thread in the snubie forum asked if one felt undergunned with a 5 shot J frame snubie loaded with 38 special +p's. That's about half the performance of the aforementioned rounds and people were content and did not feel undergunned.

I carried a J-frame .38 for about 8 years,. I felt perfectly adequate carrying it, but times have changed. In my area (I live about 10-12 miles north of Mexico, in SE Arizona) drug smugglers are known to carry full-auto firearms. ANYTHING I can carry in a belt holster is likely inadequate, but I feel a bit better about carrying 27 rounds with 1 reload than 15 with two.

About the data posted; yes, some of it will be unachievable in many firearms, but that holds just as true for the .45 ACP and 9mm as it does for the .40 S&W. Each gun is an individual, as any good handloader will know.

It is not data for factory ammo, and I never said it was. Factories must make their ammo to work in ALL guns of modern manufacture, so they tend to keep pressures away from MAX loads by enough to keep them safe for all shooters. Again, that's as true for the .45 ACP and 9mm as it is for the .40 S&W.

Most reloading data suggests backing down about 10% from top loads, and then working up to max if that's where you want to go. One can't do that with factory ammo, so they aren't loaded at max pressures.

Like I originally said, I'm NOT saying that any of these cartridges is a bad cartridge. They each have their good and bad characteristics. Any of them can, and usually does make a great SD cartridge.

But trying to boost the perception of one, by discrediting anotherr won't make either one into something it's not. They are what they are, so we really ought to discuss the true advantages, rather than putting another cartridge down to make our own choice look better.

Daryl

Glock19Fan
08-18-2010, 19:06
Here (http://www.handloads.com/calc/quick.asp)


Ok, lets start with the 9mm.
124/125 grain bullet
1169 fps/379 fpe/momentum 20/KO 7
147 grain bullet
1004 fps/328 fpe/momentum 21/KO 7

.357 Sig
124/125 grain bullet
1438 fps/569 fpe/momentum 25/KO 9
147 grain bullet
1260 fps/518 fpe/momentum 26/KO 9

.40 S&W
135 grain bullet
1434 fps/616 fpe/momentum 27/KO 11
155 graom bullet
1283 fps/566 fpe/momentum 28/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1159 fps/536 fpe/momentum 29/KO 11

.45 ACP
155 grain bullet
1135 fps/443 fpe/momentum 25/KO 11
180 grain bullet
1047 fps/438 fpe/momentum 26/KO 12
230 grain bullet
939 fps/450 fpe/momentum 30/KO 13

?

To me, its seems like that is a comparision of standard pressure 9mm loads vs hot or +p of the other calibers.

In 9mm, the 147 can move about 1100 FPS, and the 124 approaches 1300 FPS.

I have never personally shot a .40 handgun, but have nothing against it. It has its place, no doubt, but I just always seemed to lean towards the cheaper ammo. I have confidence that if someone wont go down with a 9mm, they probably wouldnt with any other popular handgun.

A G23 may be in my future, but for now its about the G19 and the 1911.

PghJim
08-18-2010, 19:50
Daryl - I imagine with the right bullet and velocity combination the 9, 357 Sig, 40 S&W and 45 ACP can be close. That goes to the reason for this thread in the first place, " Why is the 40 S&W Unpopular". I do not think it is unpopular. 9's and 45's have gotten better than in the past and many agencies are finding the 357 Sig to fit their needs better. Still, when I think about it the 40 is the ugly sister of the bunch. It is just not a sexy cartridge. It is a good cartridge, but I do not get anyone coming up to me while I am shooting and say, "Wow, is that a 40 S&W?, like I do for the 357 Sig, 10mm and even the 45 ACP.

Glockbuster
08-18-2010, 20:11
What I really like about the 357 sig (I carry a G31) is that at least to me it kicks less than a .40. The bang is impressive, but I sure feel less recoil.
Nonetheless, I love my G22 and only have praise for the .40 cal.

PghJim
08-18-2010, 20:54
What I really like about the 357 sig (I carry a G31) is that at least to me it kicks less than a .40. The bang is impressive, but I sure feel less recoil.
Nonetheless, I love my G22 and only have praise for the .40 cal.

You are correct. The felt recoil of a full power 357 Sig out of a G31 is significantly less than a 40 S&W out of a G22. I have found the 155gr and 165gr, the hardest to control out of the 40. The other thing I noticed, is that the 40 seems to turn in your hand during recoil. Your G31 should be faster to get back on target. It is for me. In fact the G32 feels a lot like a 9mm in 127 +p+ out of a G19, even though the 357 sig goes about 200 fps faster. My wife carries a G19 with the Ranger T 127 +p+ round and in a test where she did not know which gun I was giving her to shoot, she could not tell the difference.

rome2240sw
08-18-2010, 23:26
other than its looks, whats the performance differnce between the 40sw and the 10mm round? penetration, expansion, knock down power, accuracy, velocity,...

Angry Fist
08-19-2010, 09:44
^ All that. Greater velocity = deeper penetration and more bullet expansion. This equates to more knockdown power. Flatter shooting (more accuracy) is a result of the higher speeds. That is, of course assuming the 10mm is loaded properly. And if it is,

You forgot to mention expense... :rofl:

agtman
08-21-2010, 18:04
other than its looks, whats the performance differnce between the 40sw and the 10mm round? penetration, expansion, knock down power, accuracy, velocity,...

All of the above, plus ...

The .40 is ...
http://i852.photobucket.com/albums/ab89/Glock40guy/9mm.jpg

... whereas the 10mm AUTO is ...

"You know, cool like me."
http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo166/agtman/248197.jpg

:cool:

Daryl in Az
08-23-2010, 11:32
To me, its seems like that is a comparision of standard pressure 9mm loads vs hot or +p of the other calibers.

In 9mm, the 147 can move about 1100 FPS, and the 124 approaches 1300 FPS.

I have never personally shot a .40 handgun, but have nothing against it. It has its place, no doubt, but I just always seemed to lean towards the cheaper ammo. I have confidence that if someone wont go down with a 9mm, they probably wouldnt with any other popular handgun.

A G23 may be in my future, but for now its about the G19 and the 1911.

My loads listed are the top listed loads from one source used by three powder manufacturers. No tricks; just simple, verifiable data. If you doubt what I posted, you need only click a few times to check the data.

I've done quite a bit of shooting with all three cartridges (9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP). From my experiences with each, I choose to carry a .40 S&W.

That's what works for me, and a lot of LE agencies seem to agree, but the cartridges each have their benefits and drawbacks.

Others' choices will vary, of course, and I hope that they are as comfortable with their choice as I am with mine, regardless of reasoning.

Daryl

Daryl in Az
08-23-2010, 12:02
Daryl - I imagine with the right bullet and velocity combination the 9, 357 Sig, 40 S&W and 45 ACP can be close. That goes to the reason for this thread in the first place, " Why is the 40 S&W Unpopular". I do not think it is unpopular. 9's and 45's have gotten better than in the past and many agencies are finding the 357 Sig to fit their needs better. Still, when I think about it the 40 is the ugly sister of the bunch. It is just not a sexy cartridge. It is a good cartridge, but I do not get anyone coming up to me while I am shooting and say, "Wow, is that a 40 S&W?, like I do for the 357 Sig, 10mm and even the 45 ACP.

I agree...and disagree to some extent.

They can all be very similar. If someone is shot through the chest with any of them, dead is dead, and enough is enough.

IMO, it's in the "extremes" that we start seeing differences. The 9mm offers faster follow-up shots in multiple-perp type situations, but the lighter bullets of the 9mm don't hit as hard at longer ranges (I.E. The Border Patrol having to shoot across the Rio Grande at assailants). In those cases, the heavier bullets at similar or higher velocities offered by the .40 S&W may offer some advantage. The .45 ACP has a long-term, legandary reputation as a man-stopper, but the trajectory keeps if from working well in the same situation. It's a great close-range defensive cartridge, yet offers lower magazine capacity in same sized guns, as well. Above it all, the 9mm offers low-cost ammunition to those who prefer (or must use) factory fodder, and there's a lot to be said for lots of practice with one's carry gun.

Depending on the conditions one practices, carries and may have to use their firearm in, any of these can be wonderful SD cartridges. It's in the details that differences are found, and it's largely a personal choice.

Personally, I couldn't care less about impressing another with what I carry. I've gone quail hunting many times with fellas using pump and semi-auto 12 gauge shotguns, and I almost invariably kill more birds with my single shot 20 gauge that my dad gave me when I was 8 years old. Nobody "ooo's" and "aahh's" when I pull it out to hunt with, but I sure get their attention when I come back with a full limit of birds, with far more ammo left over.

Daryl

Berto
08-23-2010, 12:33
40sw is very popular. go to a range and see whay brass is left on the ground. it is usually 9mm and 40sw. they are the 2 most popular calibers.
That's been my experience too.
i don't see any lack of popularity with the .40, it's a good round.

CynicX
08-24-2010, 12:38
Surprised no one has posted this yet...

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s175/nitrofish86/velocity.jpg

That makes me want neither. I'll take the .357sig or the .45acp. Esp considering I've seen people shoot .357sig at over 1600 fps. Neural shock from that stretch cavity will bring down even the most drug crazed attackers. Which is what police forces have been reporting thru my research.

Staying on subject the the larger holes produced by the .40 and .45 will have potential to more rapidly incapacitate an attacker. The stretch cavity is obviously better too. While penetration is similar.

But a 9mm is easier to control with less recoil, muzzle flash etc. and is less expensive.

So you have to pick one. While certain ammo can simulate the effects of other calibers (+p or +p+), then you have the recoil and muzzle flash etc. PLUS its generally more expensive. Talking factory ammo, .357sig is more expensive then 9mm obviously. But to get the results of .357sig with a 9mm you have to use +p or +p+ and thats more expensive then your standard .357sig thats doing the same thing. Load a .357sig hot and you have a round that you can not match with a 9mm (no room for additional/more powerful powder).

Personally my vote is to shoot what you can handle the best. I choose .40 over 9mm for a self defense purpose. And 9mm over .40 for target shooting/plinking/whatever.

I own :

Walther p22 = .22lr
Walther PPK = .380acp
Glock 17 = 9mm
Glock 32 = .357sig
Glock 23 Barrel for the 32 = .40s&w
Assortment of 1911's = .45acp
Shotguns = 12 gauge
Savage rifle = .17hmr

So I'm not bias toward one round.

glock031
08-24-2010, 13:01
Surprised no one has posted this yet...

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s175/nitrofish86/velocity.jpg

That makes me want neither. I'll take the .357sig or the .45acp. Esp considering I've seen people shoot .357sig at over 1600 fps. Neural shock from that stretch cavity will bring down even the most drug crazed attackers. Which is what police forces have been reporting thru my research.

Staying on subject the the larger holes produced by the .40 and .45 will have potential to more rapidly incapacitate an attacker. The stretch cavity is obviously better too. While penetration is similar.

But a 9mm is easier to control with less recoil, muzzle flash etc. and is less expensive.

So you have to pick one. While certain ammo can simulate the effects of other calibers (+p or +p+), then you have the recoil and muzzle flash etc. PLUS its generally more expensive. Talking factory ammo, .357sig is more expensive then 9mm obviously. But to get the results of .357sig with a 9mm you have to use +p or +p+ and thats more expensive then your standard .357sig thats doing the same thing. Load a .357sig hot and you have a round that you can not match with a 9mm (no room for additional/more powerful powder).

Personally my vote is to shoot what you can handle the best. I choose .40 over 9mm for a self defense purpose. And 9mm over .40 for target shooting/plinking/whatever.

I own :

Walther p22 = .22lr
Walther PPK = .380acp
Glock 17 = 9mm
Glock 32 = .357sig
Glock 23 Barrel for the 32 = .40s&w
Assortment of 1911's = .45acp
Shotguns = 12 gauge
Savage rifle = .17hmr

So I'm not bias toward one round.
I have to agree with you. I have the choice of three service caliber rounds. I keep the 40sw loaded for home defense. I'd be comfortable with the 357sig but just the thought of the sound of that blast going off in my bedroom would probaly make my ears bleed. IMO the 9 makes a good carry round.

cowboy1964
08-24-2010, 13:16
To me Gold Dot 124+P has no more recoil than standard pressure.

If .357 SIG didn't have the blast it does I would be more interested. If .40 didn't have the poppy recoil it does I would be more interested. As it is 9mm makes the ideal carry round for me. .45 ACP is my "large caliber" choice.

CynicX
08-24-2010, 14:20
To me Gold Dot 124+P has no more recoil than standard pressure.

If .357 SIG didn't have the blast it does I would be more interested. If .40 didn't have the poppy recoil it does I would be more interested. As it is 9mm makes the ideal carry round for me. .45 ACP is my "large caliber" choice.

The only way to do more work is to expend more energy. That comes with either more recoil, blast or whatever.

I'm relatively recoil sensitive (not that it bothers me but I can easily feel a difference). I have a hard time telling the difference between 124+P Gold Dots 9mm and 155gr Gold Dots .40s&w.

There shouldnt be any difference between a 124gr +P Gold Dot 9mm vs a standard .357sig. Its the same bullet travel at aroundish the same speed. Why would there be anymore blast? That just doesnt make sense to me...

I agree with you on the .45acp. But with questionable penetration on occasion and limited ammo capacity I still prefer .40/.357....

LUVMYSIGP225
08-24-2010, 14:46
I am a little late to this one. But, I will throw in my guess as to the unpopularity of the round. There are many reasons that the .40 is maligned across a wide group of people.

Back when the .40 Cal cartridge was introduced, I was an avid 10mm guy. (Delta Elite and a Wyoming Arms). When the .40 rolled out, I considered it nothing more than a girl's round. The round WAS designed as a compromise by the FBI, due to the recoil of the 10mm. No offense, but if you transitioned from the the NORMA spec 10mm to a .40, you certainly felt it was a compromise or a weaker round. Maybe you had to be there and move from one round to the other. Anyhow, the 10mm crowd blamed the .40 round for essentially killing the 10mm ammo market for a lot of years. You were lucky to find whimpy 10mm loads on a good day. That all planted the seed of hate for the .40 round, for me.

Then, as the years passed, the .40 became idolized by gangsters, right alongside the TEC-9. Whether or not the round was effective, a lot of people's opinion of the .40 was already contaminated. Add to that, the fact that 9mm and .45 were already popular rounds with a huge amount of debate between what was better. Then, the .40 tried to roll in and garner some of the attention, and there was really not much room for it. I think the .40 was popular with LEO's because it was designed for LEO's. "Let's follow the lead of the FBI". Whatever.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with the round. I don't own one anymore, nor do I elect to carry it. I presently carry a .357 Sig, and am quite happy with the performance. The .40 is just another option out there, that just isn't for me. I would never criticize anyone for wanting to carry the .40 though. It is more than capable of getting the job done. To each their own.

GunFighter45ACP
08-24-2010, 14:55
Nowadays with the advancements in ammo engineering, I think the only difference between SD or duty calibers is cost.

Spending a little bit of $ typically means to stick w/what you've already got, & you just focus on buying ammo & researching which brand is the best for your use. If you have a little more $$, you'll probably buyanother gun/caliber (my guess would be something 'more powerful' that what you already have, or 'more economical' so you can do more shooting) & then pick & choose your favorite from among them. With more $$$ still, you'll get into reloading which at this point most likely means you will stick w/certain (& predictable) calibers over other choices. With $$$$, you'll buy whatever you want, then start assigning certain calibers for certain roles: 9mm for subcompacts/backup sized pistols, 40s or 45s for duty or HD, etc. With all these options, what gun/caliber will you end up using for CCW? The one that is the best size for you to comfortably carry concealed, regardless of the caliber.

Is the .40 unpopular? Yes, but only w/those that have other options, favorites, or needs.

M&P Shooter
08-24-2010, 15:27
With me I decided I didn't want a in between caliber anymore. I went all 45acp. If I want a real .40 I'll get a 10mm with a hot hand load and leave the 10mm's baby boy alone.

NonPCnraRN
08-25-2010, 01:02
I am not a hollowpoint fan. I like as close to a WFN cast bullet as possible. The Double Tap 200 gr WFNGC 40 cal bullet has the largest meplat of the 3 calibers discussed. In the 45 auto I shoot the 230 gr truncated cone bullet developed by Jeff Cooper. The Double tap bullet has a larger meplat. It comes in 200 gr for the 40 S&W and 10mm. In addition the DT 10mm has a 230 gr WFNGC. I carry the same ammo in both my G23 and G27. It is comforting to know that a hit to the center chest will pass through the sternum, heart, lungs, various major veins and arteries and the spinal column. I do not worry about over penetration as most bullets that have hit bystanders did not pass through the BG. They either missed the BG and hit the bystander or ricocheted of a solid object before hitting the bystander. If a major bone is hit I want it destroyed sending bone fragments through tissue. So far the 40 cal/10mm bullet has a larger front end than either the 9mm or 45 ACP. Regardless of velocity or what the BG is wearing in the way of clothing, I know that .32" meplat will remain the same size. If Bubba has been pumping weights at the state's expense for the last 5 years I don't want some hollowpoints stuck in his pec muscles. I'd rather have a bullet that punched through to wreak ribs, lung tissue and the scapula before exiting. The 40 cal/10mm 200 WFNGC bullet is the one for me. If Bubba happens to be a feral pig while out on the trail, that works for me too.

Angry Fist
08-25-2010, 18:34
Dayumn...

at_liberty
08-26-2010, 10:08
If the premise is true that the 40 is becoming unpopular, it is because more "girly men" are owning guns and whining about recoil in a gun that is typically high powered but light weight, relatively speaking.

I can whimp out too. I own three 40s, one relatively heavy and tame to shoot, but I choose a 9mm, 45, or 22 for a match gun or for heavy range time.

LUVMYSIGP225
08-26-2010, 10:50
If the premise is true that the 40 is becoming unpopular, it is because more "girly men" are owning guns and whining about recoil in a gun that is typically high powered but light weight, relatively speaking.

I can whimp out too. I own three 40s, one relatively heavy and tame to shoot, but I choose a 9mm, 45, or 22 for a match gun or for heavy range time.


I haven't met too many adult males that thought the .40 was all that snappy, regardless of frame. I carried the 27 for a while with full power loads, and my 10 year old son got a kick out of shooting it. He even does well with one of the other GT'ers Glock 33 in .357 Sig. The only handguns that really got my attention, were Airweight .357 Mags, and the Derringers chambered in .410/.45 Long Colt. Maybe recoil perception has has to do more with your paws, and how they fit on a particular frame.

ashtxsniper
08-26-2010, 11:22
I went with the .40 because I saw in simple terms as a cut down 10mm and it seems like a good "give and take" between the 9mm and the 45acp.

The reason I asked the question is because many law enforcement agencies are giving up the G22 .40 and going with the 9mm M&P.

also because there is so much negative feedback on this forum.

I at one time thought the .40 was going to be the end of the 9mm.

Now i see the 9mm making a huge come back.

Like I said earlier I think it is because of capacity, cost, and the fact that the 9mm is better now than it was a decade or so ago.

I think I should have asked the question differently.

I should have said, "For those who do not like the .40S&W, Please tell us why?"

Very few agencies are trading Glocks for M&P's. I haven't seen a single agency lately that has went from .40 to 9mm. Whoever told you these things is very misinformed.

at_liberty
08-26-2010, 11:32
I haven't met too many adult males that thought the .40 was all that snappy, regardless of frame. I carried the 27 for a while with full power loads, and my 10 year old son got a kick out of shooting it. He even does well with one of the other GT'ers Glock 33 in .357 Sig. The only handguns that really got my attention, were Airweight .357 Mags, and the Derringers chambered in .410/.45 Long Colt. Maybe recoil perception has has to do more with your paws, and how they fit on a particular frame.

BTW I am nursing a trigger finger callous after shooting about 175 rounds of 40 in my largest heaviest 40 on Monday evening (a Kahr T40 all steel gun). I don't get that with other guns because they don't jump around that much. It is partly the DA action. I have to get the trigger edges softened a bit. It got pretty unpleasant toward the end of the session, but I decided to shoot through that batch of ammo.

LUVMYSIGP225
08-26-2010, 13:32
BTW I am nursing a trigger finger callous after shooting about 175 rounds of 40 in my largest heaviest 40 on Monday evening (a Kahr T40 all steel gun). I don't get that with other guns because they don't jump around that much. It is partly the DA action. I have to get the trigger edges softened a bit. It got pretty unpleasant toward the end of the session, but I decided to shoot through that batch of ammo.

I have owned several Kahrs, including the PM-9 and the K-9, but I have never shot the Kahr in .40.

Again, it could always come down to fitment and, like you said, trigger edges on that particular gun.

I have big Gorilla paws, and I tend to have more problems with smaller guns, simply because I can't grip them to properly enough to control them.

Daryl in Az
08-26-2010, 15:28
Back when the .40 Cal cartridge was introduced, I was an avid 10mm guy. (Delta Elite and a Wyoming Arms). When the .40 rolled out, I considered it nothing more than a girl's round. The round WAS designed as a compromise by the FBI, due to the recoil of the 10mm. No offense, but if you transitioned from the the NORMA spec 10mm to a .40, you certainly felt it was a compromise or a weaker round. Maybe you had to be there and move from one round to the other. Anyhow, the 10mm crowd blamed the .40 round for essentially killing the 10mm ammo market for a lot of years. You were lucky to find whimpy 10mm loads on a good day. That all planted the seed of hate for the .40 round, for me.

This is very true, but the 10mm also got off to a bad start. It was hard on 1911's from what I remember, so it was slow to catch on. A gunshop I worked at in 1986 had a Delta Elite in the case for a couple of months before it finally sold. The guy that bought it did so more out of curiosity than genuine interest IIRC. When the .40 S&W came out, it was "the new kid on the block", and the fact that it was chambered in a 9mm sized package made it very appealing.

The competition between the 10mm and the .40 should never have happened. The handguns are different sized, with the 10mm being somewhat larger. Shortly afterward the movement towards "shall-issue" concealed carry began, and the .40 had a lot of appeal for someone wanting more power than a 9mm (I did), but not wanting to carry a full sized firearm. I bought my first .40 S&W in 1995, and have never been disappointed in the cartridge.


Then, as the years passed, the .40 became idolized by gangsters, right alongside the TEC-9. Whether or not the round was effective, a lot of people's opinion of the .40 was already contaminated. Add to that, the fact that 9mm and .45 were already popular rounds with a huge amount of debate between what was better. Then, the .40 tried to roll in and garner some of the attention, and there was really not much room for it. I think the .40 was popular with LEO's because it was designed for LEO's. "Let's follow the lead of the FBI". Whatever.


I suppose this one will depend on which group one pays more attention to. I watched what LEO's were carrying a whole lot more than what gangstas were carrying.

I also participated in some discussion back in the '80s about the the US military choosing the 9mm to replace the .45 ACP. Most folks I hung around in those days believed it to be a mistake; I leaned towards that side myself; especially with hard ball ammo being required.

In truth, hard-ball 9mm's performance on rabbits likely tainted by faith in the cartridge. One way or another though, I came to like the .40 S&W. For me, the relatively small package it's usually chambered in, with the power increase over the 9mm with nearly the same capacity makes it just about right for my choice of carry guns.

LUVMYSIGP225
08-26-2010, 16:56
This is very true, but the 10mm also got off to a bad start. It was hard on 1911's from what I remember, so it was slow to catch on. A gunshop I worked at in 1986 had a Delta Elite in the case for a couple of months before it finally sold. The guy that bought it did so more out of curiosity than genuine interest IIRC. When the .40 S&W came out, it was "the new kid on the block", and the fact that it was chambered in a 9mm sized package made it very appealing.

The competition between the 10mm and the .40 should never have happened. The handguns are different sized, with the 10mm being somewhat larger. Shortly afterward the movement towards "shall-issue" concealed carry began, and the .40 had a lot of appeal for someone wanting more power than a 9mm (I did), but not wanting to carry a full sized firearm. I bought my first .40 S&W in 1995, and have never been disappointed in the cartridge.



I suppose this one will depend on which group one pays more attention to. I watched what LEO's were carrying a whole lot more than what gangstas were carrying.

I also participated in some discussion back in the '80s about the the US military choosing the 9mm to replace the .45 ACP. Most folks I hung around in those days believed it to be a mistake; I leaned towards that side myself; especially with hard ball ammo being required.

In truth, hard-ball 9mm's performance on rabbits likely tainted by faith in the cartridge. One way or another though, I came to like the .40 S&W. For me, the relatively small package it's usually chambered in, with the power increase over the 9mm with nearly the same capacity makes it just about right for my choice of carry guns.

Daryl, I totally agree with your assessment.

My "gangsta" comment wasn't a shot at the .40 cartridge, but more of an observation that because of it's increased performance, it was considered "bigger" or "tougher" to the gang element. So, it was referred to quite a bit in hip hop music. Hence the term "Fowty". So, once it became popular in that genre, a lot of old school gun guys were turned off to it. They didn't want to be stigmatized with that crowd. On a larger scale, the Glock was branded a "gangsta" gun, but a lot of people, including LEO didn't let that deter them. I was simply indicating that the gang stigma may have turned people off a bit in the earlier days of the .40 round, and may have been one of the many contributing factors as to why it was controversial for so long.

But, the .40 is definitely a fine round, and anyone that chooses to use it, is making a sound decision. The O.P. shouldn't let the banter about the .40 worry him.