40 caliber?

[rc]

40 is and will continue to be one of the BEST defensive handgun calibers on the market. While the development of ammunition has helped the 9mm make a comeback, it is the price of ammo and the light recoil that have people who don't know about ballistics choosing the 9mm in greater numbers than 40. I have both, shoot both, like both but I would not say 9mm is better than 40. A 155 grain 40 load at 1150fps will smoke most any 9mm defensive load and the 135s perform similar to a 125 grain 357 mag. Even a plain vanilla 180 grain 40 load is very effective as a stopper. The 9mm tends to need more high performance ammo to compete with 40 in terms of penetration.

There is no real advantage to 9 in full size, all steel handgun like a CZ 75. The HUGE advantage of 9mm is you can put it into a small defensive gun that used to be only be available chambered in 380 and it will still be controllable compared with the much more powerful 40. Ask people how they like their K40 Kahrs. Small polymer 40s are worse and will beat you up. The K9s are very well balanced, accurate, controllable and pleasant to shoot (when they will run right). Even a 45 in a full size 1911 is controllable. Put that same cartridge in a 3 inch sub compact and you won't enjoy shooting it very much. Is 40 dead? No more so than the full sized 1911 pistol in 45.

 

[JohnKSa]

...not to mention the assertion that follow up shots with the .40 S&W take substantially longer to pull off than 9mm Luger.

There's really no question that all else being equal more recoil slows followup shots and/or decreases their accuracy. It's why there are power factor restrictions in the action pistol shooting sports, to level the field.

Is it "substantial"? Well, it's substantial enough that the action pistol sports feel the need to penalize people shooting calibers with lower power factors/recoil. But I think the point is that once it's accepted that the difference between two calibers in terms of real-world effect** isn't enough better to note a difference that there's no point in accepting any penalty for using the heavier caliber. That's whether the penalty is increased ammunition cost, reduced capacity, more recoil, whatever. Why pay a penalty (any penalty regardless of how small) if no one can demonstrate that there's a benefit being obtained in return.

**By "real world effect", I'm talking about a repeatable and measurable difference in how fast/effectively attackers are stopped using one caliber over another.

 

[Rob228]

I'll give it to the .40 that it has a ballistic edge, and I am going to back up rc's argument here, even though I am not in the class of people he stated "knows nothing about ballistics"

9mm ammo is cheaper than .40 to practice with, I can have longer practice sessions before fatigue sets in, and modern defensive ammo is nothing to turn up your nose at.

If I am shooting until the threat stops I want to be able to have faster follow up shots. If there are multiple threats I want to have faster follow up shots. If my ammo budget allowed I would buy a .40 and train to that standard. I'm going to stick with my 9's for now.

 

[totaldla]

not to mention the assertion that follow up shots with the .40 S&W take substantially longer to pull off than 9mm Luger.
.

When folks actually time themselves, there is no difference - proven over and over.

Now if your initials are JM, then there is a difference.

 

[Rob228]

When folks actually time themselves, there is no difference - proven over and over.

Now if your initials are JM, then there is a difference.

You're probably right. But I know at the end of a long practice session I am fighting a .40 a lot more than I am a 9mm.

 

[TunnelRat]

When folks actually time themselves, there is no difference - proven over and over.

Now if your initials are JM, then there is a difference.

I would disagree with this in owning both myself. I don’t think you have to be Jerry Miculek to see a difference. If the argument is that 40SW has better ballistic effect on a target then that same energy should be noticeable to the shooter. Now whether the difference in speed is significant is another question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Desmosedici]

I don't have vast experience on the .40, but I have shot a few different ones and have enjoyed most of them. Glocks in .40 are snappier than I like, but I'm sure that could be trained on and mitigated. My older brother has a Ruger SR40, and by all means I think that is a fantastic weapon. It's construction mitigates recoil a lot, and is very, very accurate. I don't know if it is just that gun, but the Ruger SR's are very underrated in my opinion.

Not sure why anyone would deny the ballistic advantage of the round; its not leaps and bounds better than 9mm, but it it is superior.

As many have mentioned, there are so many good guns out there in the caliber when the LE migration back to the 9 milli happened. If things ever get back to some semblance of normalcy there has to be some great deals in the future for firearms chambered in .40.

 

[Forte S+W]

When folks actually time themselves, there is no difference - proven over and over.

Now if your initials are JM, then there is a difference.

Oh, I'm sure that there's a difference, but to use a favorite term used by 9mm Fans when referring to the differences between 9mm and .40cal, it's a marginal difference.

Now I'm sure that someone will be along shortly to tell me how it totally matters because that .2 second difference would make the difference between victory and defeat in competition shooting, but I'm obviously not talking about competition shooting here, I'm talking about self-defense.

Also, I'm sure that folks could come up with some extremely specific situations in which .2 seconds would make the difference between life and death, and congratulations, you'll totally be better prepared than me in that extremely specific scenario you came up with when it inevitably occurs any day now. I concede defeat to the theoretically infinite power of imagination, which can turn anybody's favorite cartridge into the absolute best thing ever, but once again, I'm not referring to a self-defense scenario which is taking place inside of your mind, or even my mind for that matter, otherwise I'd just invent some scenarios in which .40 S&W always beats 9mm Luger. Or you know what, on second thought, I wouldn't...Because it's not a contest, not to me anyway, and I don't really need the cartridge I carry to be the very best (even if only in my mind) in order to feel confident carrying it, to enjoy shooting it, or admit that I prefer it to whatever cartridges are trendy this decade. Frankly, I'm okay with it being second best, third best, or even the absolute worst, so long as it will actually get the job done.

 

[Rob228]

Because it's not a contest, not to me anyway, and I don't really need the cartridge I carry to be the very best (even if only in my mind) in order to feel confident carrying it, to enjoy shooting it, or admit that I prefer it to whatever cartridges are trendy this decade. Frankly, I'm okay with it being second best, third best, or even the absolute worst, so long as it will actually get the job done.

Common sense has no place in a cartridge debate!

 

[JohnKSa]

When folks actually time themselves, there is no difference - proven over and over.

Maybe that's true when folks time themselves, but when other people time/score them, there is a difference. That's why the action pistol sports split competitors by power factor.

For fun, I once did an analysis of the scores from several GSSF matches. GSSF match scores are posted online and GSSF has a category called Heavy Metal. Competitors in that category must shoot a pistol chambered in .45ACP, .45GAP or 10mm. There is also a category called Amateur Civilian and most shooters in that category compete with 9mm pistols although it’s legal to compete with any caliber in that category. Both categories use exactly the same course of fire.

These matches do not include drawing, movement, or reloads on the clock, so the score is purely based on accuracy and time. The scores are actually just times, with penalties added based on accuracy.

This means that we can look at shooters who compete in both categories and see how their scores differ. Of course, it’s important to understand that this will UNDER estimate the performance degradation since it’s not a straight comparison between 9mm and .45/10mm. That’s because Amateur Civilian has no caliber restrictions and therefore a shooter could compete with a 9mm, .357SIG, .40S&W, .45GAP, .45ACP or 10mm if he/she wished to. Still, because most shooters compete in Amateur Civilian with 9mm pistols, it should provide some useful data even if it underestimates the factor we’re concerned with.

I downloaded the results from two of the larger matches held one year and compared the scores of all of the shooters who shot an entry in both categories. So if "Frank Smith" shot in both categories, his scores from each category would be compared. If "Ann Jones" shot in only one of the categories, her score would not be included in the comparison.

On average, the scores (time combined with accuracy penalties) from the Heavy Metal category, when compared with scores from the same shooters in Amateur Civilian were about 20-30% worse.

It's important to note that these are NOT master class shooters. However, the scores are designated in such a way as to allow the master class scores to be evaluated on their own.

Turns out that extra recoil also makes a difference to the master class shooters--just less of one. Their scores were only degraded by about 10%.

So, yes, recoil does make a difference in performance when the goal is to shoot accurately and rapidly. And it makes MORE of a difference to less accomplished shooters than it does to more skilled shooters.

 

[TunnelRat]

I think there’s a point to be made here about not wearing your heart on your sleeve when it comes to cartridge choices. Some people seem to get emotionally attached to what are inanimate objects even when the differences between those objects are small enough at times (not always) to fall within margins of error. To some extent I understand the behavior because people are making decisions that they believe could impact their survival and they don’t make those decisions lightly. On the other hand sometimes people seem to need validation of their decisions and when they don’t get it they become upset.

The reality is that at some level this is an enthusiast forum (I don’t mean that in a negative way). People are going to debate the same issues over and over and likely won’t change opinions in the process (and that’s been true of any enthusiast forum I’ve been a part of, not just firearms). At least I’ve seen that personally in my years here. Old ground gets retread because some new article is written or some new member joins and hasn’t seen that discussion here before. I think we all need to be mindful that the arguments someone else might bring up in explaining their points of view aren’t inherently a condemnation of your personal choices (although it can get personal at times and that’s why in part we have moderators). At the end of the day it’s highly unlikely that any of us here are going to be there to help each other out in the event we need to defend ourselves. Do what works for you and be happy in that (to borrow from Forte in spirit).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shurshot]

100 years ago, many declared the .38-40, .44-40 dead. Not by a long shot.

 

[Shadow9mm]

For me with modern firearms reliability, and good bullet design anything from 380 up is plenty adequate for EDC IMHO. The bullets will reliably open and penetrate deep enough to hit vitals as most are tested against the current FBI Protocols and many people on youtube test and show these results.

My personal choice is 9mm. Why
adequate defensive ammo
common cartridge in current military use
higher capacity in the same size as other larger calibers
reduced recoil allowing faster follow up shots

All things being equal, the only shot that count are the ones that hit. hitting a moving target while moving yourself while your hear rate is jacked is not an easy thing to do. 9mm lets me keep the gun on target easier and I have more round to make a hit with.

Note: This is only my personal preference and why I have made that choice and I am not inferring that anyone else's choices are bad. Just my personal choices

I knew this was going to turn into the great caliber debate again... sigh....

 

[Moonglum]

liked the .40 S&W until I had to shoot it out of a plastic gun.

The first .40 I ever shot was a CZ75B. It was a great big heavy steel gun that just soaked up the recoil. My second .40 was a S&W model 4006. Again a relatively heavy steel gun that mitigates recoil.

When I worked as an armed guard my employer issued the S&W M&P40. It was a good gun and I generally shot 290(ish)out of 300 possible every time I qualified with it but by the end of the training session I was feeling the recoil and I developed a flinch. It wasn't a fun gun to shoot like my M&P9 is.

 

[Onward Allusion]

9mm, 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 10mm, 45 ACP are all common calibers. All have their use.

 

[JC57]

I have a Glock 22 chambered in .40 S&W. At the time I bought it, .40 was plentiful and cheap and 9mm was not. That is my only .40 S&W firearm.

I also have a drop-in 9mm conversion barrel for it and some 9mm Glock magazines. It has proven to be completely reliable in both configurations.

I could not really tell any significant difference in recoil, accuracy, or anything else on the range using practice ammo, and the .40 did not feel any different from 9mm +P.

Seems like a decent enough firearm and I expect that ammo for it will be produced for as long as I will live. I have no complaints with the .40 S&W caliber.

 

[Shadow9mm]

I have a Glock 22 chambered in .40 S&W. At the time I bought it, .40 was plentiful and cheap and 9mm was not. That is my only .40 S&W firearm.

I also have a drop-in 9mm conversion barrel for it and some 9mm Glock magazines. It has proven to be completely reliable in both configurations.

I could not really tell any significant difference in recoil, accuracy, or anything else on the range using practice ammo, and the .40 did not feel any different from 9mm +P.

Seems like a decent enough firearm and I expect that ammo for it will be produced for as long as I will live. I have no complaints with the .40 S&W caliber.

Always wondered about the reliability of the 9mm conversion barrels. good to know.

I have considered getting a G23 (as I love the size of my G19) and getting 9mm and 357 sig conversion barrels just so I could shoot 3 different cartridges out of the same gun.

 

[ejfalvo]

In my totally irrational mind, I carry a P365 in 'safe' areas (around the neighborhood, local shops...), when Im heading to the 'big city' I carry the P229 40SW. Why? I have no reasonable explanation - other than in my muddled mind, I think the 40SW is going to stop any issue better. No realistic support behind it - just my mind saying its a bigger bullet, it has to be better (no real support). And its not as if the issues at a local shop would be any different than in the 'big city'. Train with both, comfortable with both. Maybe I need help.

 

[TRX]

> 10mm - recoil is severe
> 40 s&w - just right

Over half of all "10mm Auto" is loaded identically to .40 S&W.

Looking at a number of reviews, the name of a cartridge would seem to be a more important factor for felt recoil than the actual ballistics.

 

[Cosmodragoon]

I was late to the party on .40 S&W. I made the mistake of trying it in polymer subcompacts and instantly wrote it off. Then I started using it in full-sized guns that properly mitigate recoil. Under those circumstances, I like it a lot and can appreciate the increased power versus 9mm.

In the right gun, I really do prefer .40 S&W to either 9mm or .45. It offers an excellent balance of power, recoil, and capacity. That goes for some of the steel guns mentioned, full-sized polymer guns like the USP and PX4, and also the PX4 Compact.

Of course, those guns aren't always the best choice for EDC. They might work in the winter but when I'm dressed for warm weather, the polymer subcompacts are hard to beat. That usually means dropping down to 9mm and unless I'm out in the woods, that's fine. If I'm really dressing light, I'll go with .327 Federal in the LCR.