45 cal. vs 40 cal.

HOGUEMEISTER · 07-28-2010, 20:05

I currently shoot a 45 cal. and have been happy for years. What are your thoughts on the 40 cal.? Any comparison on speed, take down, etc?

Thanks for the info.

Hoguemeister

BadAndy · 07-29-2010, 06:05

Only advantage I see is that .40 comes in a smaller package that is easier for people with smaller hands to control and higher capacity than comparably sized .45s.

Aside from that, seems that a lot of people (including myself) find the recoil of .45s more manageable than .40. To me, the .40 feels snappier and it's a bit slower getting back on target.

I'll stick with my 9s

ldrichard · 07-29-2010, 07:39

I own both calibers in HK USPc pistols.

The .40 is definitely more snappy than the .45, and the .45 definitely has a larger grip circumference than the .40.

The .40 is more comfortable to hold, but the .45 is more comfortable to shoot. I take both to the range.

I carry a gun to protect my family, not to just hold it. So I carry the .45 since, at least for me, it is easier to manage.

DerekL · 07-29-2010, 07:42

If grip size isn't a factor I love my G30 it's much more managable than a .40 in the same size. IMHO.

DonGlock26 · 07-29-2010, 10:17

The difference for me is double stack in 40 & single stack in 45.

woncrzymof0 · 07-29-2010, 10:43

I do not own a .45 yet. Main reason is the price difference. I cannot justify shooting .45 at the range all the time. Even if I reloaded it, it's expensive.

Will have one in the future though.

***Glockdude1*** · 07-29-2010, 10:52

I shoot both the .40 and the .45 equally well, but the .40 is my favorite caliber. You get the speed of a 9mm with the hitting power of a .45.

Win win for the .40.

rome2240sw · 07-29-2010, 10:55

16 rounds of 40 compared to only 10 rounds of 45. Think i will take the 40 any day. Cheaper than 45 ammo, a lil snappy but its other pro's make up for that. A lighter faster traveling bullet, almost comparable expansion, price$$$, and its a tried and tested round. Get on the horn with your local PD and ask why they picked up the 40 over the 45.

engineer151515 · 07-29-2010, 11:56

<<< Have not been a big fan of the .40 because of the snappy recoil.

That said, I sure wouldn't turn one down in a fight.

***Glockdude1*** · 07-29-2010, 12:28

.40 Snappy??

I really feel many of you guys need a gym membership.

**DWARREN123** · 07-29-2010, 12:30

I really believe it has more to do with the shooter and firearm than the caliber but having said that I just really like the 40 S&W.

***FullClip*** · 07-29-2010, 14:01

The .40 S&W (aka 10MM short) came into being in 1990..just 20 years old...so it's only another passing fad.

It's one of the very few handgun rounds that I don't have. I figure for a full sized pistol, I'll stick with the .45 and 10MM, and if I want something smaller..then the 9MM can fill the bill.

Am surprised they haven't come out with a .42 1/2 yet to split the differance and create another "solution for a problem that doesn't exist".

greenlion · 07-29-2010, 15:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by rome2240sw

16 rounds of 40 compared to only 10 rounds of 45. Think i will take the 40 any day.

If we are talking GLOCKS here, that would be 15+1 compared to 13+1. Thats pretty darn close. 2 rounds.

greenlion · 07-29-2010, 15:13

I've always thought an 11 millimeter round would be interesting. That would be .43 caliber, which is really close to the .44 special, which I've always really liked. And, I bet you could squeeze it into a G17 sized frame, if you can do the same with the GAP.

Glock1911 · 07-29-2010, 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenlion

I've always thought an 11 millimeter round would be interesting. That would be .43 caliber, which is really close to the .44 special, which I've always really liked. And, I bet you could squeeze it into a G17 sized frame, if you can do the same with the GAP.

Maybe Gaston should have thought of that when he came up with the GAP.

greenlion · 07-29-2010, 15:26

I have a Love/Hate relationship with the .40S&W. I admit, in some factory defensive loads, I don't like the snappiness of it, other are not too bad.

I think one problem stems from the fact that shooters want everything pushed to its upmost limit. If an inexperienced buyer walks by and sees one box that says "low recoil ammo" and another that says "hyper velocity-screw Einstein, I'm gonna go faster than light- super nova magnums" , they will buy the latter. What we end up with is a bunch of overpowered rounds that everyone complains about being too snappy, and no way to inject common sense back into the equation, because of the "bigger and faster is always better" buying public.

The .40 in its original form, a 180 gr bullet doing 950 fps, is not bad to shoot. Neither are medium velocity 165 gr rounds. My absolute favorite target load is a 165 gr .40 with a moderate charge of Hodgdon Clays. I like the recoil of that round MUCH more than any I've worked up for 9 or .45. It snaps back on target really fast and the sights track really well.

Unfortunately, manufacturers loading well balanced defensive ammo are hard to find, and even when they do introduce a low recoil line, it may not succeed in the buying market very long.

Dean22 · 07-29-2010, 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenlion

If we are talking GLOCKS here, that would be 15+1 compared to 13+1. Thats pretty darn close. 2 rounds.

I think he is referring to needing a single stack because of the grip size. I could be wrong.
My opinion: ballistics are nearly the same, it's cheaper and I get more rounds for the same size glock. Simple answer for me, the .40 has my heart

panzer1 · 07-29-2010, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by FullClip

The .40 S&W (aka 10MM short) came into being in 1990..just 20 years old...so it's only another passing fad.

It's one of the very few handgun rounds that I don't have. I figure for a full sized pistol, I'll stick with the .45 and 10MM, and if I want something smaller..then the 9MM can fill the bill.

Am surprised they haven't come out with a .42 1/2 yet to split the differance and create another "solution for a problem that doesn't exist".

As far as the 10mm gos can you still find full power 10mm rounds? I have been thinking of maybe getting something in 10mm but was not sure if you can get good ammo for it. I shoot the 45,40,9mm as will as the 357sig and like them all. What gun to you have in 10mm? I myself like a steel gun but don't know of any in 10mm.What do you think?

Eber_Rabb · 07-29-2010, 17:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by HOGUEMEISTER

I currently shoot a 45 cal. and have been happy for years. What are your thoughts on the 40 cal.? Any comparison on speed, take down, etc?

Thanks for the info.

Hoguemeister

Better to be happy. No idea whether a .40 S&W would make you happier. Some prefer the size and relative capacity for their needs when choosing a .40 or a 9mm. Some bigger gents seem less affected. Go to a range and rent a .40 - that's the best indicator.

9mmParabellum · 07-29-2010, 17:14

Not a fan of the .40cal and would not stand in front of one either. I shoot a 9mm if I up graded it would be a .45acp

Remember the good old days 9mm or 45, now we have 357sig, 45gap, 10mm they will all kill you learn how to shoot very very well be able to hit what you are shooting at and under stress you will be fine.

**MrMurphy** · 07-29-2010, 17:21

Carried a .45 for 10 years and a 9mm on duty for 3.

I wouldn't go out of my way to get a .40, as my other pistols are 9mm and .45, but it's not a bad round. I'd use one if I was issued it but if you're comfortable with a .45 stick with it. The .40s do tend to have more muzzle rise/snap.

dreis454 · 07-29-2010, 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenlion

If we are talking GLOCKS here, that would be 15+1 compared to 13+1. Thats pretty darn close. 2 rounds.

I'll take the one that makes the bigger hole & load it with PDX1s

rome2240sw · 07-29-2010, 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean22

I think he is referring to needing a single stack because of the grip size. I could be wrong.
My opinion: ballistics are nearly the same, it's cheaper and I get more rounds for the same size glock. Simple answer for me, the .40 has my heart

yeah i was referring to the single stack because of grip size. MOST guys i know who carry a .45 including my father carry one with 10 rounds and one mag of ball ammo and a mag of JHPs.

The recoil of the .40 doesnt really bother me. I'm pretty accurate with it and ammo for the .40 is cheap as well as you can find .40sw anywhere in SC. My dad goes store to store when he needs to refill his ammo stash for his .45auto.

The .45 may make a bigger whole, but im down for lighter faster cheaper as well as more capacity in the magazine. If we were talking GLOCKS i would take a 21SF or RTF2 G23 over anything. But i love my G22 best SD gun ever. IMHO

greenlion · 07-29-2010, 19:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by rome2240sw

yeah i was referring to the single stack because of grip size. MOST guys i know who carry a .45 including my father carry one with 10 rounds and one mag of ball ammo and a mag of JHPs.

I'm still not following you here. The highest capacity single stack 1911 or SIG 220 magazine that fits flush for carry purposes is 8 rounds. Where are you getting 10 ??

rome2240sw · 07-29-2010, 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenlion

I'm still not following you here. The highest capacity single stack 1911 or SIG 220 magazine that fits flush for carry purposes is 8 rounds. Where are you getting 10 ??

My fault my friend, i was thinking about ruger firearms. but 8 9 or 10 its all less than 16 rounds of 40 in a glock.