.40 from a short barrel?

C

Cosmodragoon

New member
Alright, I know the caliber debate is over. All the experts got together and voted. There's a better consensus on it than there is on global warming. The best caliber for self defense is 9mm and it's all anyone would ever want or need.

Well, I'm one of those weirdos who still likes .40 S&W in full-sized firearms where the recoil isn't so snappy. One of my favorites has been the Beretta PX4 Storm, which I believe was built for .40 in the first place. With mild recoil, it's a joy to shoot. Of course, it's too big for a CCW.

Being a DA/SA guy, I had previously considered the PX4 Storm Compact Carry edition in 9mm. It's still a little chunky but definitely a joy to shoot. I especially like that it's decocker-only. So I got to thinking. Why not take advantage of the chunk, and that rotating barrel system, and get one in .40 S&W?

For all the other weirdos out there, does your opinion of .40 S&W change when it's coming from a short barrel?
 
W

Warhammer

New member
I still love my Khar K40 that I bought way back in 1996. I've never really understood why so many people find the recoil of .40 S&W so daunting. Maybe it's because I shot a .40 for years before I ever shot a 9mm, so it just feels normal to me. My K40 has a 4" barrel.

IMGP0987 by Rex Keely, on Flickr
 
T

TruthTellers

New member
I wouldn't have an issue with the compact Px4 in a .40, that would be a pretty ideal size and recoil system for the caliber. As for subcompacts I don't see much benefit to .40 over 9mm. I have a G27 Gen 4 and the recoil with .40 is stout. I wouldn't say it's a snappy recoil, but it is bouncy and it's not a gun that you can shoot like a full size 9mm. I would say the fastest I can shoot it is one round a second.

I would like to buy a cheap 9mm conversion barrel, but they've been elusive for some reason.

Back to the Px4, looking at Gunbroker the prices between .40 and 9mm are not much, almost identical. I'd think about this before buying because if you can get the 9mm for the same price it defeats a lot of the benefit of buying a .40 for less.
 
C

Cosmodragoon

New member
The price difference isn't a factor. If I got the PX4 Compact in .40 S&W, it'd be getting upgrades right out of the gate. I'd get it on par with the Compact Carry edition, though I might go hard chrome instead of cerakote.

I'm mostly interested in the general performance of .40 S&W from a shorter barrel.

I know the caliber war is "settled" in favor of 9mm for clean hits to vital spots. I find myself thinking about marginal hits, firing from compromised positions, and raw damage to muscle and bone. Results on "meat targets" and other backyard media tell me that the .40 S&W does in fact have something to offer for the cost in recoil and capacity. The problem is that said understanding is entirely based on .40 S&W fired from full-sized guns like the PX4, P226, and USP.
 
R

RETG

New member
I have shot the PX4 .40 compact and it is a lot like the full size PX4 .40 (which I own two of) and it is about the same. A bit more "flip" but recoil is about the same.

I was going to purchase one; however, it is almost as heavy as the full size so for around town carry I went to a 9mm H&K P30SK. But when doing serious hiking in the forests around here, I still carry the full size .40 PX4 with 200 gr ammo.
 
D

dontcatchmany

New member
I have Shield 40 and it is a great shooter.

I also have full sized 40s and (3) and at one time or another I carry them all.

No problem with recoil of either and all very accurate!

I would not want to be on the receiving end of either!
 
F

Forte S+W

New member
I don't know much about how .40 S&W performs out of a short barrel based on personal experience because my .40s have 4" Barrels.
However, based on what I've seen and heard from folks who have carried .40cal pistols with shorter barrels, any decrease in Ballistics performance is no worse than a 9mm Luger suffers out of a shorter barrel, in fact if anything .40 seems to suffer a bit less than 9mm.
 
F

Forte S+W

New member
Warhammer said:
I've never really understood why so many people find the recoil of .40 S&W so daunting.
Click to expand...

Based on my observations, it's because they were either shooting a subcompact, lightweight .40cal pistol, 135gr Loads, or both.

It's rare that you'll see anyone complain about .40 S&W being "too snappy" then following up that statement by specifying that they were shooting a Glock 23-size or larger/heavier firearm loaded with 165gr-180gr bullets.

Furthermore, there was a period in time in which folks wanted the smallest, lightest, most powerful pistol they could get their hands on and 135gr .40 S&W Loads were all the rage, ergo it's safe to assume that a fair amount of folks who complain about how harsh the recoil of the .40 S&W cartridge are basing that comment on an experience that had when they bought a Kel-Tec P-40 with a box of 135gr Speer Lawman or Federal HydraShok, took it out to the range, then immediately traded it in, thinking that's how all .40s recoil.
 
K

Kreyzhorse

New member
I didn't like it out of my Sig or my Glock 22. I don't however mind it out of my S&W M&P Compact.

It's smooth shooter coming out of that gun. It's a snappy round to be sure and that gun just fits my hand perfectly.
 
T

TruthTellers

New member
Forte S+W said:
Based on my observations, it's because they were either shooting a subcompact, lightweight .40cal pistol, 135gr Loads, or both.

It's rare that you'll see anyone complain about .40 S&W being "too snappy" then following up that statement by specifying that they were shooting a Glock 23-size or larger/heavier firearm loaded with 165gr-180gr bullets.

Furthermore, there was a period in time in which folks wanted the smallest, lightest, most powerful pistol they could get their hands on and 135gr .40 S&W Loads were all the rage, ergo it's safe to assume that a fair amount of folks who complain about how harsh the recoil of the .40 S&W cartridge are basing that comment on an experience that had when they bought a Kel-Tec P-40 with a box of 135gr Speer Lawman or Federal HydraShok, took it out to the range, then immediately traded it in, thinking that's how all .40s recoil.
Click to expand...
It's also because most people are shooting pipsqueak 115gr 9mm. There is a significant difference between 115gr 9mm and 165gr .40, even in a full size pistol.

Pistol size also has an impact and most people choosing between a 9 and a 40 are not shooting full size pistols, thus the recoil from .40 is more noticeable.

I think back in the day most people were not buying .40 Kel Tecs, they were probably buying Glocks because those were all the rage. Can't think of any other compact or subcompact polymer .40's that were around 20+ years ago.
 
F

Forte S+W

New member
I'm actually more used to 9mm advocates swearing by 124gr +P Loads because they "Just as powerful as .357 SIG" *swings arm in an upward arc* and the only complaints I've ever heard about 9mm being snappy is from folks who were shooting 147gr +P Loads out of an LC9/EC9s or other such subcompact, lightweight pistols.
So I don't think it has anything much to do with folks who shoot 9mm trying .40 then feeling it had too much recoil compared to 9mm. In fact, I know a few folks who were big into the G19 and were leary of shooting .40cal, only to be surprised to learn that out of a G23, .40 doesn't feel all that different from 9mm.

The P-40 was an intentionally extreme example, but you'd be surprised at how popular the P-40 was. People like Glocks, but the Kel-Tec was lighter and cheaper than the G27, and often times newbies who just want a gun to carry and aren't really into what's trendy tend to gravitate towards inexpensive lightweight firearms.

Also, as previously mentioned, I've rarely seen folks complaining about the .40 S&W having harsh recoil, then following that statement up with anything of similar size/weight to the G23, it's always subcompact, lightweight firearms like the M&P40 Shield.
 
L

lee n. field

New member
Cosmodragoon said:
Alright, I know the caliber debate is over. All the experts got together and voted. There's a better consensus on it than there is on global warming. The best caliber for self defense is 9mm and it's all anyone would ever want or need.

Well, I'm one of those weirdos who still likes .40 S&W in full-sized firearms where the recoil isn't so snappy. One of my favorites has been the Beretta PX4 Storm, which I believe was built for .40 in the first place. With mild recoil, it's a joy to shoot. Of course, it's too big for a CCW.
Click to expand...

Pistol-forum.com has some long running threads on the PX4 Storm, in its various chamberings. Folks there seem to like them.


Being a DA/SA guy, I had previously considered the PX4 Storm Compact Carry edition in 9mm. It's still a little chunky but definitely a joy to shoot. I especially like that it's decocker-only. So I got to thinking. Why not take advantage of the chunk, and that rotating barrel system, and get one in .40 S&W?

For all the other weirdos out there, does your opinion of .40 S&W change when it's coming from a short barrel?
Click to expand...

Ballistics By the Inch would be the place to go for the numbers.

I have an XD subcompact in .40. Never a problem shooting it. For all that, though, I seldom carry it.
 
F

FotoTomas

New member
In my case a .40 S&W out of my Glock 22 and my Glock 27 Is as easy to shoot as my 9mm versions. On the other hand my ex Glock 23 always gave me minor discomfort. The slight difference in grip configuration was my downfall and I have no use for a 23 now. All of my .40 Glocks have 9mm conversion barrels as well as some .22 kits and the occasional.357 SIG barrel. I like options.
 
D

doofus47

New member
My shortest barrelled .40 is a cz100. The barrel is ported, but it's a fine shooter.
I have a full-size Walther P99 in .40 that is as easy to shoot even though the barrel is non-ported.
 
C

COSteve

New member
FotoTomas said:
In my case a .40 S&W out of my Glock 22 and my Glock 27 Is as easy to shoot as my 9mm versions. On the other hand my ex Glock 23 always gave me minor discomfort. The slight difference in grip configuration was my downfall and I have no use for a 23 now. All of my .40 Glocks have 9mm conversion barrels as well as some .22 kits and the occasional.357 SIG barrel. I like options.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I wonder what your hand size is. Large palm or small, long fingers or short, fat fingers or skinny. I consider these because as the owner of a custom Glock 20/21L I developed way back in 2004 using a German steel slide I later had hardchromed, a G22, G23, and G24, my carry piece since 2004 has been the G23 and I have no issues with it.

I like options too, however, because I handload I can make up any kind of load I want, I only shoot calibers starting with a 4 in my Glocks; 40s&w, 45acp, 10mm, and 45 Super with not a 9mm to my name and I still shoot cheaper than with 9mm commercial ammo.

My CCW G23 has TruGlo TFO sights, 3.5 connector and 6lbs trigger spring shooting 180grn handloads at just under 1,000fps with no snap and great followup. Hand size plays a role in pistol selection because the differences define what feels comfortable to each of us.

As you can see, I've got a large palm and long, thin fingers so I can grip even my large framed custom G20/21L with a Hogue Handall on it and still touch my middle finger knuckle with my thumb.

Rm5dvCQ.jpg
 
4

44caliberkid

New member
I just obtained a Stoeger Cougar 40 S&W, which is a Beretta Cougar copy. It is DA/SA, has a decocker safety. It has the rotating barrel system. I think the barrel is 3.5 inch. Being a full size 92 frame, it handles recoil very well. You can find these for $300 - 350.
 
T

Tygus.Shooting

New member
.40S&W isn't so bad...

The EDC combination that I carry the most is a G23 as primary, backed up by a Ruger LCP.

Let me just say that I would rather fire 15 rounds of .40S&W out of the Glock, than fire 7 shots of .380ACP out of the Ruger.
_____________________________________

I love gun control. It lets me hit what I'm shooting at!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top