9 mm vs 40 S&W [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : 9 mm vs 40 S&W


feathers73
08-03-2010, 19:13
I have been trying to do some research on 9 mm versus 40 S&W. I know the debate will probably never be totally put to bed, but do you think a 9 mm 147 gr bonded bullet has a significant disadvantage over a 180 gr 40 S&W bonded bullet?

cowboy1964
08-03-2010, 19:27
Significant? No. Slight? Probably. But in reality whichever you can shoot more accurately and faster and more confidently is the better choice.

One way to look at it is both 147gr 9mm and 180gr .40 are going to go roughly the same velocity. Is the extra 0.045" in diameter and 33gr weight going to make a difference? Or will the lighter recoil, greater capacity, lower cost (allowing one to practice more) offset that advantage?

All other things being equal, bigger and heavier bullets are better than small light ones. But nothing is ever equal in all other things.

f150man
08-03-2010, 19:29
Gee, this is like asking if you preferr Fords or Chevys.


Myself, I'm a big bore man. 10mm, .45acp, etc. I've never seen a reason to own a 9mm. My main CCW weapon is a G23. It's a compromise in concealibility and firepower.

So, why in the same size package would I want a 9mm when I could get a .40S&W?

At the same time if you blast a BG with 4 or 5 9mm HPs and they all land in the COM area he will be dead.

It doesn't matter if they are plain jane 115grs or if they are some super duper 147gr +P+ wonder bullet.

J

BadAndy
08-03-2010, 19:44
No. The .40 will make a slightly larger hole and possibly go a little deeper but there isn't a significant disadvantage with the 9mm.

2afreedom
08-03-2010, 20:26
I would argue that the .40 has an advantage because it is a larger, heavier bullet. On the other hand a lot of people can shoot 9mm more accurately due to it having less recoil, especially when used in smaller guns. In the end I would pick the one that I shot best and not lose any sleep over it.

rome2240sw
08-03-2010, 21:50
No. The .40 will make a slightly larger hole and possibly go a little deeper but there isn't a significant disadvantage with the 9mm.

what he said

fredj338
08-03-2010, 23:01
I would argue that the .40 has an advantage because it is a larger, heavier bullet. On the other hand a lot of people can shoot 9mm more accurately due to it having less recoil, especially when used in smaller guns. In the end I would pick the one that I shot best and not lose any sleep over it.
The 9mm/147gr & 40/180gr have the same SD. If both are of the same construction, they will penetrate about the same. So let platform be your guide. I like 9mm in smaller guns, 40 in full size guns. I only get 10rds, I like the biggest holes I can get, even if they are marginally bigger.

bigdollars
08-03-2010, 23:34
you are better off going with lighter rounds. I suggest the 115 or the 127 for 9mm and the 155 or 165 for .40. 180 does not perform as well (expand as well) as the others and the 147 is just to powerful for a 9mm.

JBP55
08-04-2010, 04:08
you are better off going with lighter rounds. I suggest the 115 or the 127 for 9mm and the 155 or 165 for .40. 180 does not perform as well (expand as well) as the others and the 147 is just to powerful for a 9mm.

Most LEA's go with heavy for caliber for more penetration and less perceived recoil.

frankmako
08-04-2010, 04:40
here we go again.

English
08-04-2010, 06:57
I have been trying to do some research on 9 mm versus 40 S&W. I know the debate will probably never be totally put to bed, but do you think a 9 mm 147 gr bonded bullet has a significant disadvantage over a 180 gr 40 S&W bonded bullet?

I would put it the other wqy round. I think that the 9mm 147gr bullet has a significan disadvatage relative to just about any .40S&W bullet other than ball and,for that matter, relative to good 115gr and 125gr 9mm bullets.

English

Eagle22
08-04-2010, 07:20
Significant? No. Slight? Probably. But in reality whichever you can shoot more accurately and faster and more confidently is the better choice.



I agree

fredj338
08-04-2010, 09:09
you are better off going with lighter rounds. I suggest the 115 or the 127 for 9mm and the 155 or 165 for .40. 180 does not perform as well (expand as well) as the others and the 147 is just to powerful for a 9mm.

This tells me you need to do more shooting.:upeyes: BUllet design has everything to do w/ performance, more so than bullet wt. You can certainly make a good 180gr JHP or a poor 115gr 9mm. Depending on your interpetation of "power", most 147gr 9mm are actually on the anemic side of the "power" curve.

happyguy
08-04-2010, 10:12
Either one will do just fine if you do your part. The "your part" is what we need to work on.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

bowtie454
08-04-2010, 10:24
Gee, this is like asking if you preferr Fords or Chevys.


Myself, I'm a big bore man. 10mm, .45acp, etc. I've never seen a reason to own a 9mm. My main CCW weapon is a G23. It's a compromise in concealibility and firepower.

So, why in the same size package would I want a 9mm when I could get a .40S&W?

At the same time if you blast a BG with 4 or 5 9mm HPs and they all land in the COM area he will be dead.

It doesn't matter if they are plain jane 115grs or if they are some super duper 147gr +P+ wonder bullet.

J

I would agree with you, but something tells me we don't see eye to eye :)

bigdollars
08-04-2010, 10:29
This tells me you need to do more shooting.:upeyes: BUllet design has everything to do w/ performance, more so than bullet wt. You can certainly make a good 180gr JHP or a poor 115gr 9mm. Depending on your interpetation of "power", most 147gr 9mm are actually on the anemic side of the "power" curve.

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1226930 Mas Ayoob agrees to stay away from the 147. they are not as effective.

bmylesk
08-04-2010, 10:53
im just a thin 150lbs. 6ft tall guy and i shoot a G23 .40, 180gr JHP ammo. less velocity i know, but i don't need personal protection at 100 yrds. i say choose what you want to shoot and practice religiously with it. for me, at first it took getting use to, but now i can hit a bulls-eye at 15-20ft away consistently. i choose what i have because of penetration, and damage. personally the 180gr could have a less recoil.

granitemonkey
08-04-2010, 10:56
According to what I read Ayoob said stay away from the old low-tech 147gr hollowpoints. He approves of the new high-tech premium rounds IE; HST's, Ranger-T's and Gold Dots which all of those I use. That being said, I also like all of the above in any flavor offered.

fredj338
08-04-2010, 11:03
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1226930 Mas Ayoob agrees to stay away from the 147. they are not as effective.
First you were saying the 147gr were too powerfull, now it's not as effective! Which is it my man?:dunno: Besides, anything written by CH carries about as much weight as anything written here.

BadAndy
08-04-2010, 11:45
I loaded some 147gr XTPs to 900fps and they expanded nicely to .56". They also penetrated three 1 gallon water jugs with ease.

at_liberty
08-04-2010, 12:03
Anyone in doubt about major caliber (starts with 4 or bigger in inches) capability should watch a bowling pin match sometime. That is to say that penetration and expansion alone are not sufficient measures of effectiveness.

bigdollars
08-04-2010, 12:31
First you were saying the 147gr were too powerfull, now it's not as effective! Which is it my man?:dunno: Besides, anything written by CH carries about as much weight as anything written here.


ok dude

IndyGunFreak
08-04-2010, 12:31
No. The .40 will make a slightly larger hole and possibly go a little deeper but there isn't a significant disadvantage with the 9mm.

:agree:

IGF

fredj338
08-04-2010, 12:59
ok dude
Just trying to keep you focused "dude".:whistling:

fredj338
08-04-2010, 13:01
Anyone in doubt about major caliber (starts with 4 or bigger in inches) capability should watch a bowling pin match sometime. That is to say that penetration and expansion alone are not sufficient measures of effectiveness.

Momentum is nice, but also not definetive. In the same thought, shoot gal water jugs w/ slow moving 230grFMJ, unimpressive, but knocks the crap out of a BP. A 90gr 9mm @ 1400fps blows the water jug to pieces, but hardly moves a BP.:dunno:

windplex
08-04-2010, 13:02
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1226930 Mas Ayoob agrees to stay away from the 147. they are not as effective.

BigDollars, nice citation!

Thanks Mas!

windplex
08-04-2010, 13:03
Contrary to popular belief 9mm bullets don't bounce off people and 40 cals don't guarantee a one shot drop.

Either will do fine with the proper choice of ammunition and application of skill.

Guess which cal I have:)

Jeff82
08-04-2010, 13:23
Anyone in doubt about major caliber (starts with 4 or bigger in inches) capability should watch a bowling pin match sometime. That is to say that penetration and expansion alone are not sufficient measures of effectiveness.

Adequate penetration is everything, without it you've got nothing. After you achieve penetration (12"-18" in properly calibrated gelatin) then you can look for some extras. (momentum, expansion, energy numbers, whathaveyou)

Jeff82
08-04-2010, 13:27
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1226930 Mas Ayoob agrees to stay away from the 147. they are not as effective.

BigDollars, nice citation, wrong interpretation!

Fixed it for ya!

unit1069
08-04-2010, 19:06
Long answer to short question: I still don't trust conventional construction 147 grain 9mm subsonic JHP. If you prefer a 147 grain subsonic, I would call the Federal HST and the Winchester Ranger-T a close tie, would certainly consider the Speer Gold Dot, and would want to look at actual shooting performance with the Remington Golden Saber. Personally, I'll stay with Winchester 127 grain +P+ in my own 9mms, followed by Gold Dot 124 +P and the various 115 grain JHPs at 1300 fps or better. (Mas Ayoob)

This seems pretty straightforward to me. Mas doesn't like most of the 147-grain ammo offered. The exceptions are the HST and Ranger T, with a "possibly" given to Gold Dot and Golden Saber --- if he was inclined to carry them which he clearly is not.

But the bottom line is he considers the lighter ammo he named better rounds for 9mm due to their already-proven capabilities in stopping deadly encounters and function in 9mm pistols.

My own opinion is that if I wanted a handgun caliber to mimic the .45ACP I'd just buy a .45ACP and have the real deal. I love the one top-notch 9mm pistol I own and the 124-grain ammo is just right for it. Not to say I might not change my mind someday but I just don't see the need to stretch a caliber's capabilities to the point where it's a matter of diminishing returns.

packinaglock
08-04-2010, 19:15
This seems pretty straightforward to me. Mas doesn't like most of the 147-grain ammo offered. The exceptions are the HST and Ranger T, with a "possibly" given to Gold Dot and Golden Saber --- if he was inclined to carry them which he clearly is not.

But the bottom line is he considers the lighter ammo he named better rounds for 9mm due to their already-proven capabilities in stopping deadly encounters and function in 9mm pistols.

My own opinion is that if I wanted a handgun caliber to mimic the .45ACP I'd just buy a .45ACP and have the real deal. I love the one top-notch 9mm pistol I own and the 124-grain ammo is just right for it. Not to say I might not change my mind someday but I just don't see the need to stretch a caliber's capabilities to the point where it's a matter of diminishing returns.

Well said!

SouthernBoyVA
08-05-2010, 06:36
A very well known gun writer believes the Glock 23 to be the best combat sidearm you can carry (Boston T. Party in "Boston's Gun Bible"). The man is very opinionated but he does have a measure of knowledge. Do some research on how the different loads perform in these two calibers (I have and carry both, though the .40S&W is my personal preference). Checkout Tennessee Outdoors Nine videos and his many testings for some info. Also, here are two links you may find interesting.

http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal%20Ballistics%20as%20viewed%20in%20a%20morgue.htm

The link that is entitled "Observations from actual shootings" on this site. I can't seem to get to it at this time.