Is the .40 S&W a safe round?

[meat]

I do not proclaim to be a firearms or ammunition expert. I also don't believe everything that I read on the internet (especially w/ regard to newsgroups - lots of urban legends out there). With that as an introduction, I have been shooting for a little over a year now and have taken the basic handgun safety and training classes. I mostly shoot 9mm for budget reasons (it allows me to practice more often and inexpensively).
I recently started taking a friend of mine shooting w/ me to introduce him proprly to the shooting sports. Now he's caught the bug and wants his own handgun. However, after his shopping around and looking through all the handgun magazines he's decided that the .40 S&W is the round for him. He asked me what I thought about it. So, not having much knowledge about the .40, I turned to the firing line and the internet for some info. Well after reading all the stuff about kabooms, reloads, etc., I have some concerns regarding the .40. I don't know what's true and what's not! Still, I couldn't help but wonder why so many law enforcement agencies would use a round that seems to have so many problems that would almost seem to make it unsafe. Something isn't right here. So my question is (to those who have experience and knowledge regarding the .40), is it an unsafe round? Does it have inherent design problems (being overcharged, etc)? If the round does or did have these problems, has it been remedied? Thanks in advance for the responses. I don't want to be responsible for recommending the .40 to a friend if it is indeed unsafe.

 

[Snowdog]

I wouldn't give the KBs scare with the .40S&W a second thought.
You'll get KBs with .45acps and other rounds as well if the conditions are right.
I've seen thousands of rounds through my .40 caliber handguns without any nasty Kabooms... not to mention the hundreds of thousands of rounds of .40S&W fired from folks I know.
I hear smoking is a possible factor in SHC (Spontaneous Human Combustion), but I've never seen it happen. I wouldn't attribute this as a significant reason to stop smoking either.
I hope this helps.

 

[bountyh]

I believe the .40SW is unconditionally safe as long as some guy isn't trying to load it up too hot and then shoot it in an unsupported barrel. Another problem is using beat up brass. I buy reloads from Home Ammo Direct in .40 and have not had a problem. The guy there loads to the SAMMI spec in once fired brass.

When loading up to major power factor in .40SW, IMO it is a mistake to use anything but new brass just for safety reasons. Good used brass might be OK, but why risk it for a few bucks?

The other factor in .40SW safety is whether or not the barrel design fully supports (surronds) the case. In some Glocks there was a significant area of the case unsupported and that will cause a Kaboom IF THE AMMO IS LOADED TOO HOT AND/OR THE BRASS IS A LITTLE WEAK. IMO, new .40SW ammo from any good ammo maker is safe to shoot in just about any gun. I think the Kaboom events result from over-loading and shooting in unsupported barrels.

 

[swampgator]

It's just as safe as any other round out there.

As for its popularity with LE agencies, keep in mind that a lot of agencies traded up from a 9mm to what they felt would provide the greatest stopping power. The 10mm was the FBIs answer but it was too powerful so it got loaded down and thus the .40 came to life. I guess a lot of agencies just jumped on the bandwagon.

The Kabooms seem to be mainly a Glock problem. I've seen the safety warning reports come across NCIC from agencies who've experienced KBs in G22s and G23s, though in Glock's defense a lot of agencies seem to be using reloads to qualify, and the KBs usually occur during qualification. So in that area it's a toss up. But as near as I can tell Glocks and .40s don't mix. I don't own one so I can't say for sure.

Another area of concern is that the .40 seems to suffer more than other calibers when bullet set back occurs. It's a high pressure round to begin with so any reduction in OAL and you're asking for trouble. Charles Petty did a good article a few years ago on the relation to bullet set back and increased chamber pressure.

If a .40 is what you want, get it. If you load for it, use common sense and good manual. I bought a Springfield P-9 in .40 recently (my first .40) and I still haven't really run it enough to see where it shines.

 

[Blackhawk]

I don't know what's true and what's not!

About the .40 S&W? Neither does anybody else, it seems.

It's not that it's "overcharged", the "gamey" aspect stems from the fact that it's a compact round -- meaning that there's not much "extra" space in the casing. Consequently when heavier bullets, like 180gr, are used, the bullet is pretty much compacting the powder charge when shoved far enough into the case to get the proper overall length. On ignition, some pretty high peak pressures can be developed.

If the rounds are reloads, the casings have been fired before, and there's no way reloaders can determine if they have metallurgical flaws before reloading. High pressures and tiny casing flaws are usually implicated in Kabooms, and .40s have them more often because it IS a high performance round.

If your friend wants a .40, more power to him. There are a lot of shooters who are very happy with them despite the expense, recoil, and being hard on the gun. (Many or most gun designs that shoot the .40 were originally designed to shoot the 9mm Luger.)

IMO, he'd be happier to start out with a 9mm, then move to a .40 or .45 if he wants something bigger. Otherwise after shelling out for .40 ammo and finding out that Wal-Mart sells 9mm for about $11/100, he's going to be tempted to buy .40 reloads, and that I believe would be a real mistake....

 

[M1911]

It appears to me that .40 and .357 Sig may be less tolerant of mistakes than other rounds. That is, a bullet setback problem that may cause no trouble with a lower pressure caliber might cause trouble with a .40 or .357 Sig.

Does that make it unsafe? I don't think so. I've got a number of .40s and so do my friends. Never seen one blow up. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is relatively rare. And when guns do blow, it seems that in most cases there are at most minor injuries to the shooter (provided they're wearing glasses).

I have seen a blown up .38 Spcl. Knowing the knucklehead who reloaded that round, I don't blame the caliber

M1911

 

[22lovr]

If you have a quality gun and ammo....

NOOOOOO problem. The .40 S&W is a high-pressure intense round, no doubt. Sometimes, it's the gun or the ammo that is at fault if we're talking about those "kabooms."

If you stick to qood quality factory-fresh ammo and your gun is in good shape, the .40 is an excellent, powerful round.

 

[MikeJ]

I have a Glock 23 and a Sig 229 both in .40 and have never felt uncomfortable with this round in either gun. I don't reload or buy reloads, I only use fresh ammo from reputable companies. Mistakes can happen anywhere so I just try to minimize that possibility. I have an opinion on the hearsay regarding kabooms, and that is if there was a real problem using new factory ammo in ANY gun it would be highly publicized. As you mentioned, many LE agencies are going to the .40 and many shoot Glock .40's. Its interesting too that when the 40 Smith & Wesson first came out some folks liked to refer it as the 40 "short and weak". Suffice it to say I don't pay alot of attention to unsubstantiated rumors. I have shot many other .40 caliber guns and none of them gave me cause for concern. As others have mentioned if you are reloading your own or are buying reloads, you need to know what you are doing or what the person doing the reloading is doing. I say if your friend wants a .40, go for it although I have come back to enjoying the 9mm as my favorite shooting round.

 

[asleepinTucson]

Why does KBs and Glock always seem to be associated. Don't shoot lead and Don't shoot reloads and then don't worry about shooting .40 Glocks.

Short and sweet

and remember that opinions are like *******s. Everyone has got one.

Stick to the facts. Most Glock .40 KBs were either with reloads or lead fouled barrels.

My Glock 27 is like my American Express card. I carry it everywhere

 

[Poohgyrr]

I remember hearing about a lot of self inflicted gunshot wounds with .38 revolvers. Maybe we should ban .38's, the round that is, (and revolvers) as being unsafe.

Well, ok, maybe I'm being a bit extreme............

 

[Arub]

The .40S&W is perfectly safe, unless you are standing directly in front of it when fired.

 

[rocko]

As mentioned above, there is less room for error in the .40 than in other popular rounds, which is I believe where most of the problems stem from. The standard load is pretty much at the maximum pressure the cartridge can handle (notice how there are no +p .40 loads?) so if you are reloading and load a round a bit too hot or seat a bullet a bit too deeply, you are more likely to have problems vs. the 9mm or .45. If you are shooting factory loads, I don't think you'll have a problem. If you reload, just be sure to be careful (as you should be doing anyway...). I would also avoid rechambering rounds (i.e., don't unload it every day and keep using the round that was previously chambered) as that increases the potential for bullet set back as well.

I think alot of the popularity of the .40 round in the civilian market is due to the 94 crime bill. If the same sized frame pistol is limited to 10 rounds anyway, and you are comfortable shooting a .40, why not take the larger, more effective (yeah, yeah, I know) caliber? If it is not replaced when it expires in 2004, I think we'll see a resurgance of 9mm - then the choice won't be 10 rounds of 9mm vs. 10 rounds of .40, but 17 rounds of 9mm vs. 15 rounds of .40, 14 rounds of 9mm vs. 12 of .40, etc.

The ammo is much more expensive though, more expensive than increased material costs should dictate, IMHO. However, there also isn't a surplus ammo market that they need to compete with. If this is going to be his only pistol, unless he has deep pockets, I would sort of lean towards the 9mm. Actually, I would recommend he get a decent .22 (ruger mkII, buckmark, etc) to learn with regardless.

Rocko

 

[juliet charley]

If you stick to qood quality factory-fresh ammo and your gun is in good shape, the .40 is an excellent, powerful round.

There have been enough documented cases of kB!s in various Glocks to make the above a long ways from being an absolute truth.

Stick to the facts. Most Glock .40 KBs were either with reloads or lead fouled barrels.

Why would anybody want to buy a handgun in which you could not shoot high quality factory reloads (e. g., Georgia Arms)? While I prefer jacketed bullets in my autoloaders, why would anybody want a handgun in which you could not shoot lead?

For the record, Georgia Arms .40 S&W lead reloads are $130/1000, jacketed reloads $150/thousand, and new ammunition $260/1000. Buy a handgun in which you have to buy new, jacketed bullets, and you double your cost of shooting (not to mention a calibre that requires more practice in which to attain and maintain mastery). For comparison, the cheapest Georgia Arms 9x19 ammunition is $115/1000. You could shoot 2000 rounds of 9x19 for $30 less than what you would pay for 1000 rounds or .40 S&W (or else you could make a start on saving for some good training).

The .40 S&W just does not make sense.

 

[Radicalcleric]

Is the .40 a safe round? No! It can cause serious injury or death if you are shot with it.

 

[Redlg155]

The .40 is a safe round.

I'd suggest that he first get a rental gun and see if he can handle the recoil impulse from the .40 comfortably. I find the .45 to be much more comfortable. It also shoots a "He Man" bullet to boot!(Thumping Chest..)

Just curious, what choice of handgun was he leaning towards?

Good SHooting
RED

 

[rocko]

There have been enough documented cases of kB!s in various Glocks to make the above a long ways from being an absolute truth.

Seems more like an issue with the gun design rather than the design of the round, to me.

Why would anybody want to buy a handgun in which you could not shoot high quality factory reloads (e. g., Georgia Arms)? While I prefer jacketed bullets in my autoloaders, why would anybody want a handgun in which you could not shoot lead?

I don't think it is a problem with high quality factory reloads - more like people rolling their own which are outside of SAAMI specs.

As far as the lead, once again that is a design of the firearm (polygonal barrel) and has nothing to do with the .40 round. You can shoot lead in .40 all day in a conventially rifled barrel. Similarly, you should avoid shooting soft lead out of a polygonal barrel in any caliber. The .40 may be slightly more sensitive to excessive barrel leading because it is already a higher pressure round, but the problem is certainly not unique to that caliber.

The .40 S&W just does not make sense.

For LE, perhaps not. Then again, the people who make these decisions are typically far removed from the people who will actually be using the guns. For new guns in the civilian market for which preban mags are not available (or in short supply and very expensive), I believe it absolutely makes sense. Take the USP compact series, for example. The "real" capacity of the guns are 9mm=13 rounds, .40=12 rounds, .45=8 rounds. However, the law restricts us to 9mm=10 rounds, .40=10 rounds, .45=8 rounds. If preban mags were available (yeah, I know 13 rounds unmarket 9mm USPc mags are showing up now, but probably of questionable legality), the 9mm would be a more viable option. However, since we are limited to 10 rounds in either 9mm or .40 in a pistol of the exact same size, I'd say take the larger caliber...

Rocko

 

[M1911]

I roll my own. Don't trust factory reloads. I separate my brass by headstamp and number of times reloaded -- commercial reloaders can't do that.

M1911

 

[meat]

My friend is interested in the glock 23 and the cz-75 in .40. After talking to him tonight, I think I have him convinced to get a 9mm just for the reason of ammo cost (more range time). Thanks for all of the advice.

 

[kpw]

I still don't know if its safe....

.....I'll let you know when I get another 15k rounds through my Glocks with no Kbs and no malfunctions at all. I like the .40, not as much as the .45 but for the 9mm size pistols that fits into. Natchez has Blazer for $6.99 and S&B for $7.60 plus shipping. $8.99 and $9.99 where I buy around here. More than 9mm ammo but cheaper than .45.

 

[CZ_]

My CZ 75B is chambered in .40. The barrel is nearly fully supported, and I've never even had any bulges on spent .40 cases so far. I think if you use a fully supported barrel (or one that is very close), stay away from 180 grain bullets in .40 (occasionally the bullet can set back and develop unsafe pressures with the 180 grain) , and only use factory ammo you should be fine.

If you take reasonable precautions, only the guy standing at the muzzle end of your .40 is in any danger!