.40 is assuming an intersting and unexpected role IMHO.

[treg]

I too have found the 10mm Special to be a fine cartridge around the farm.

The SR40c has proven to be a great platform. Plenty of power in a convienient, reliable package with adjustable sights for hittin where yer aimin' on the vermins, small game and other targets of opportunity. I handload tuned loads to maximize accuracy at moderate velocity.

The 9mm is a great great farm pistol cartridge as well IMHO (.22LR on steroids). I chose the .40 for its slightly heavier bullets. Many valid arguments could be made for either.

 

[22-rimfire]

The 9mm is a great great farm pistol cartridge as well IMHO (.22LR on steroids). I chose the .40 for its slightly heavier bullets. Many valid arguments could be made for either.

22LR on steroids. That's funny.

The only arguments I can make for 9mm vs 40 S&W is magazine capacity, less recoil usually, and perhaps ammunition availability. An instructor told me..... so you shoot with the 40 S&W, I would just shoot two rounds with 9mm in a self defense situation. My thought was... whatever.

 

[MarkCO]

How many of you have examined the link between USPSA Limited and the surge in .40S&W sales? I would argue that the sales of .40 climbed right after the .40 was declared as the minimum for major PF in USPSA, which is the largest Division in USPSA. Then several years ago, 3Gun took off just after "Production" came into play in USPSA and lo and behold, sales of 9mm jumped about then too.

Granted, competition shooters are a small segment of the gun owning sector, but when you look at the numbers...the average gun owner shoots less than 50 rounds a year and the average competitor is closer to 10K a year, The consumption of the competitive shooters outpaces LE sales of ammunition.

 

[t4terrific]

I know that 40 S&W is a high pressure round and has a reputation of being harsh, but I have both a g19 and a g22 and really don't feel a lot of difference between them even when firing 180gr HPs in the 40.

Your senses must be dull. [emoji3] There is a very measurable, and noticeable difference between the two.

While I agree that .40 isn't as bad as people make out in a mid-full size auto, it's considerably more than a 9mm in the same platform.

 

[BigJimP]

MarkCo is right....calibers like the .40S&W and .38 super....are still very popular within the competition shooter communities....

and while I am not one ...( especially as I get into my mid 60's ) ...I still wanted a nice "race quality gun" so I bought this X-Five L-1 model in .40 S&W ...about 10 yrs ago / when they were pretty new on the market, partly just because it was something different....

http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=86634&d=1359744729

its been a great gun...and fun to shoot once in a while ( L-1 model has the adjustable trigger in it / so you can dial it anywhere between 2.0 and 4.0 lbs )... mags hold 14 rounds of .40 S&W...

http://sigsauer.com/CatalogProductDetails/p226-x-five.aspx

 

[1-DAB]

the relevant number is the muzzle energy. looking at Hornady.com, for their Critical Duty loads,

9mm: 135gr, 1010fps, 306 ft-lb

40sw: 175gr, 1010fps, 396 ft-lb

about 29% more energy for 40sw. if you are shooting similar size pistols, say a pair of Sig P320s, you should notice more felt recoil with the 40sw round.

you normally get about 2 more 9mm rounds for the same size platform.

both rounds above, and many others that are similar, pass the FBI barrier tests.

 

[mavracer]

Granted, competition shooters are a small segment of the gun owning sector

An old auto racing saying was "what wins on sunday, sells on monday"

Jerry Miculek has a lot of folks buying Smith revolvers

 

[serf 'rett]

Let us not overlook the next step up from Hornady.com, for their Critical Duty 220 grain +P 45 Auto 975 fps, 464 ft-lbs 5 inches from chamber. Close to 52 percent more energy than the 9mil.

My 40S&W steel frame has significantly more recoil than my 9mm plastic fantastic. And I think it has more snap than the 45 Auto plastic too. The steel frame should dampen the recoil, but it still takes a tad more time to get back on target with the 40S&W.

calibers like the .40S&W and .38 super....are still very popular within the competition shooter communities....

Not so much in the IDPA community around here. After working a couple of recent lost brass matches, I kicked into Brass Rat mode and crawled around picking up the leavings - an estimated 10K of 9mm, 1600 pieces of 45 Auto but only around 200 pieces of 40S&W with some of the 40S&W cases appearing to be issue ammo (good way to save $ shooting a match is using "free" ammo).

 

[Sevens]

Hey, always fun to have these interesting discussions and personal opinions. It is an enjoyable conversations when gun guys get together to talk guns.

But it's even more enjoyable and more productive when we avoid trying to make mountains out of molehills. Let the record show that I have been a 10mm nut since ~1985 and loading/shooting it since 1992. For -years- I was not only a card carrying .40 S&W hater, I wanna say I was a founding member of that club!

Reality and experience has it's influence too, however. And in the real world, .40cal is absolutely not the "10mm Special." Cute moniker but not based in fact in nearly ANY meaurable or historically significant manner. Pretty much just sounds a lot like some weak and ignorant boasting that might be overheard in a gunshop... something that you'd laugh at under your breath, much like the dumptruck sized load of nonsense you often overhear at a gun shop.

 

[Ruger45LC]

I've always liked the .40, but being a handgun enthusiast I own and load for several different cartridges. Sometimes I might be in a .45 mood, sometimes a .40 mood or sometimes I might be in the mood for 10mm. I never get in a 9mm mood but I have nothing against it

I can see why some don't like the .40, but personally if I had to choose between the .40 or 10mm I'd choose the .40 just because it's cheaper and only a little less powerful. It would be a lot harder to choose the .40 over the .45 though, but I could probably do it. The .40 brings a lot to the table, it's certainly not wimpy as my G24 (okay, G35 w/G24 barrel in it...) can run 180's near 1400 and 200's near 1300, which is a lot more than what most think the .40 can do.

 

[WVMountaineer]

It's bigger than a 9MM and smaller than a 45 ACP. It has a niche.

God Bless

 

[lee n. field]

An instructor told me..... so you shoot with the 40 S&W, I would just shoot two rounds with 9mm in a self defense situation. My thought was... whatever.

Kind-a my thought. Internet gunboard pundits overthink this way too much.

you normally get about 2 more 9mm rounds for the same size platform.

So, if you've got a problem that 12 rounds of .40 won't fix, 15 rounds of 9 will?

 

[1-DAB]

more zombies between reloads.

 

[smee78]

And thats why I went with my FNX-45, 15+1 rounds of 45acp means I dont compromise, even to a zombie! I have a 40 but it is really not one of my favorites, I like my 9 or 45's better. I shoot the 40 OK but I just dont love the round.

 

[Will Beararms]

Every Sig .40 I have shot in the compact of full size variety has been very controllable. My Gen. 2 Glock 22 was brutal. My Gen. Glock 23 was very nice. My Gen. 4 Glock 22 is a " house cat " to shoot.

The older I get, the more I like shooting the 9mm as the old sports and construction work in my 20's injuries are magnified. I do not endorse the .40 in a sub compact configuration. For me it's Sig P239 and up sized handguns. That's just me.

I just find it interesting how the .40 has become a decent utilitarian choice due to it's adoption by numerous agencies and the competitive shooting world. I believe the demand is driven by competition and agency requirements.

I have no love or hate for the round. It's just there.

 

[lee n. field]

I do not endorse the .40 in a sub compact configuration. For me it's Sig P239 and up sized handguns. That's just me.

Try the XD Subcompact in .40, if you have a chance. It's pretty heavy -- 32 oz loaded. Far heavier than the Glock subcompacts.

 

[cougar gt-e]

While I agree that .40 isn't as bad as people make out in a mid-full size auto, it's considerably more than a 9mm in the same platform.

The very popular +p 147gr 9mm has more felt recoil, snap, etc than the also popular 155gr .40.

 

[walks with gun]

I usually carry a Commander in 45 but have been thinking for those who would rather carry a auto in the woods, a 40 might be a good choice. The 9mm seems a little light sometimes and the 10mm seems a bit much for trail plinking and the occasional small game. The high cap 40 might make a fine woodsman's gun, I sure don't have any problems carrying the like powered 38-40.

 

[22-rimfire]

I was always a revolver man in the woods. I don't think there are many situations that I need more than 6 rounds...... yeah, I know, a pack of feral dogs or wolves. But generally, I like the heft of a big revolver in 357 mag or 41 mag for just general carry. Not much for plinking with centerfires and if I intend to plink more than a gun load, I'll take a 22 with me.

The 40 S&W does what it was advertised to do when it was developed and I was always fond of the in-between calibers (40 S&W and 41 mag).

At this point in my life, I don't much care if someone prefers 9mm or 45 ACP. The 40 is all I need and probably then some.

 

[Ruger480]

If the .40 had come about before the 10mm I could respect it. Even appreciate it. But because it it came into existence as a result if the 10 being "too much", I despise it. I view it as sign that we are getting soft. I have the same feeling where the 308 vs '06 is concerned.

We should be going the other way. I'd like '06 ME from an auto loader with a 17 rnd mag please