No love for the 40

[Jason D]

On 1/20/2018 at 10:03 AM, Happyguy said:

My PX-4 Compact in .40 is the only gun I will carry AIWB.

 

I don't have much confidence in 9mm with a 3-3.5 inch barrel.

 

Regards,

Happyguy

Luckygunner has some testing data they've published on 9mm defensive rounds, and it is worth a look.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/#9mm

 

If you click on the round you are interested in, it opens to more data including the gun used for testing. They used to list barrel length, but I see that's gone now. 

When I carry a pocket sized 9mm. The gun is always loaded with Federal HST. My short barrel load is the 147 grain +P HST fwiw. 

[jonb32248]

I've looked at the ballistic's on the three,9,40,45, and there's very little difference when you compare 9 to the others. The size of the wound is in some part the most important.From what I see I'll stay with my 9mm. I reload for all my guns and don't see the need for anything bigger.With the ammo choices out there I can find a good self defense round that will do the job as good as most other rounds. It works for me and hope you are satisfied with your choice's.

[mlk18]

Attention: The following is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree without becoming emotional or offended.

The 6.5 Creedmore is very similar to the .270 Win. One shoots a touch flatter, the other drifts a little less. But in real world practicality and in most applications they are pretty much equal. Buying a new 6.5 isn't going to make anyone a better shooter or more lethal at ranges than a guy who is already good with his .270. The difference is that only the 6.5 is the newest and greatest caliber on the market. Which mean ammo makers will sell tons of ammo, gun makers will sell tons of guns, optics makers will sell new optics, and the industry will make lots of money. And that's all it's about.

That is also exactly what the .40S&W was. The next best thing that would sell a ton of new guns to both the police and civilian markets. And now that the newness is gone, the testing complete, the guns sold to PD's everywhere, and the realization that it really didn't become a magic bullet people pretended it would be; those same companies are now pushing the 9mm as just as good with even higher capacity! So now they can make new 9mm bullets, sell a whole new batch of 9mm guns, etc., etc.

I have no love for the .40 and consider it to be an unnecessary compromise between the power of a .45 and the capacity of a 9mm. But then again I prefer Thai food to Chinese food.

Edited June 30, 2018 by mlk18

[brtarr1]

.40 call G23 or G27 have been my EDC for many years.  I shoot well with it, the most important thing. 

[Will Beararms]

On 9/30/2017 at 9:24 PM, Jason D said:

The .40 gets hate all the way around. 

 

You got people that hate it because it isn't a full power 10mm, now people hate it because the Feds say 9mm is now superior to all other rounds. I hated the .40 for many years, though I strapped one on and carried it every day. I am set up to load for it so it's cost wasn't an issue. I can't rightly remember why I hated it now though. I bought a 10mm a year or so ago and had in epiphany. The .40 S&W might just be the perfect round for a full sized duty weapon. You have .45 power with near 9mm capacity.

 

The 9mm is only superior today because the FBI says so. If they came out tomorrow and said the .32 H&R magnum was the best round for defense, half of gun owners would ditch the 9mm in a heart beat. 

 

 

...but bullet technology!

...but torque!

...but follow up shots!

...but 9mm guns into .40!

...but explosions, bloody hand, missing fingers!

 

Bullet tech carries over.

Stop being a *****.

Grow bigger muscles Nancy.

So ****ing what.

Learn to reload better, or buy better ammo. 

 

 

The simple fact is that a good defensive load in .40 S&W will trump the **** out of a smaller caliber. It will hit harder, impart more energy, and the hollow point in theory should open up much larger. I've had a Glock 22 since 1994 and haven't worn it out, or blown it up yet. I would take it full of 180 HST's over any 9mm. 

 If the 9mm works for a person then more power to them. Making a decsion based upon FBI upper management judgement might not be profitable.   

[Will Beararms]

Go out and shoot steel plates with a 9mm, .40 and .45 then get back to me about bullet selection and shot placement. Shoot the biggest most powerful caliber you can shoot accurately. Real life is not about calculated formulas.  The 9mm is a great choice for large agencies in this era. They live in everyone gets a trophy nirvana.  

The 9mm will serve you well but to suggest the .40 does not have a good purpose or to suggest the .45ACP is no different than the 9mm might be stretches.  Frankly and all things considered, the .40 might be the best all around choice those who have the physical ability to shoot it well.  As far as platform longevity goes, let’s see how those Glock Gen. 5 9mm’s fare after a deacde or more of high pressure ammo. 

[G23c]

3 hours ago, mlk18 said:

Attention: The following is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree without becoming emotional or offended.

The 6.5 Creedmore is very similar to the .270 Win. One shoots a touch flatter, the other drifts a little less. But in real world practicality and in most applications they are pretty much equal. Buying a new 6.5 isn't going to make anyone a better shooter or more lethal at ranges than a guy who is already good with his .270. The difference is that only the 6.5 is the newest and greatest caliber on the market. Which mean ammo makers will sell tons of ammo, gun makers will sell tons of guns, optics makers will sell new optics, and the industry will make lots of money. And that's all it's about.

That is also exactly what the .40S&W was. The next best thing that would sell a ton of new guns to both the police and civilian markets. And now that the newness is gone, the testing complete, the guns sold to PD's everywhere, and the realization that it really didn't become a magic bullet people pretended it would be; those same companies are now pushing the 9mm as just as good with even higher capacity! So now they can make new 9mm bullets, sell a whole new batch of 9mm guns, etc., etc.

I have no love for the .40 and consider it to be an unnecessary compromise between the power of a .45 and the capacity of a 9mm. But then again I prefer Thai food to Chinese food.

Oh no, you had to go there ... this thread will never end!

[fortyofforty]

58 minutes ago, G23c said:

Oh no, you had to go there ... this thread will never end!

[Maestro]

There are definitely some great deals to be had on .40 pistols, so that’s one advantage. Some pistols handle the round better than others. 

[dpadams6]

Love the 40 and have benefited on several I have bought lately because of the low prices. Thank you, to those that hate it.

 

 

[Rev.]

The only issue I have with the 40 is reloading. I simply don't trust reloads in a 40, not even my own. 

[Bucky]

On 10/20/2017 at 7:52 PM, fortyofforty said:

In terms of handgun accuracy, nobody shooting to earn a living is choosing the .40 S&W.  The top competitors do not use it.  It's fine for minute of badguy accuracy, but for precision shooting it's not the round of choice.  Facts are facts.

The most popular division in USPSA is Limited. EVERY top shooter in USPSA limited shoots .40. 

Facts are indeed facts. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Bucky

[Collim1]

I don’t hate the .40, but I would have never owned one if not for law enforcement. I was issued a .40 for thirteen years. Just recently got issued a gen 5 Glock 9mm. 

 

I kept my issued Sig P226. It’s the only gun I own in .40, and it’s unlikely I will ever buy another one. 

[Will Beararms]

Time is needed to verify the efficacy of the 9mm. Until then, you’ll heae everything but the sound of meat frying or money rattling. 

[fortyofforty]

58 minutes ago, Bucky said:

The most popular division in USPSA is Limited. EVERY top shooter in USPSA limited shoots .40. 

Facts are indeed facts. 

Only because the rules dictate that 9mm is "minor" and .40 S&W is "major", with scoring penalties for 9mm.  Remove that rule and watch what happens.  Facts, indeed.

[Valmet]

While I still “have love,” for the .40, I can’t say that I’ve shot my old Gen2 23 much in recent years. I ccw’d that thing everywhere for years (and it shows) but I’ve been shooting much more 9mm since about 2011-12 and the 23 sits in the safe. 

 

I tend to agree with the current idea that the .40 is only marginally better than a 9mm with modern ammo, but .40 is still a very viable choice especially with great deals on LEO trade-ins and the availability of effective and affordable quality .40 ammo. 

[G26-Has-my-6]

I still have a lot of love for the 40, especially since it's only a barrel change away from shooting 357sig, which is maybe my favorite carry caliber.

What am I saying???? I love them all...9mm, 40, 357sig, 10mm, and yes, even that heavy bowling ball 45 !!

[Will Beararms]

‘Funny thing is the 9mm has to be at near .40 pressures to be effective. The FBI transition to the 9mm did not happen because the .40 wasn’t an effective round. Some can handle the .40 and some can’t. I’m one of those that can. 

Edited July 3, 2018 by Will Beararms

[Borg warner]

On ‎9‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 9:01 PM, Tahmail said:

G23. Accurate, powerful and reliable. What's not to love?

Accurate, powerful, reliable and versatile. I have a G23 with a KKM 40-to-9 conversion barrel and a G32 Lone Wolf barrel I can shoot the cheaper factory 9mm ammo and I also have the option of 357 Sig which duplicates the ballistics of the mighty 357 Magnum with 125 grain bullets. The first Glock I ever shot was a G17 and I didn't like it and probably never would have owned a Glock if it weren't for the fact that I secretly lusted for a G20 Glock in 10mm for many years.

Then I found a police turn-in G19 at a local Gun shop and picked it up an handled it and liked it so much better than the G17 that I had shot years earlier that I bought it. But then I started learning about Glocks and found out that I could have the same size gun as the G19 in the more powerful 40 caliber so I bought one of those and I was surprised to find, when shooting the tow guns side by side,  that the difference in recoil between the two guns was hardly even noticeable and that neither gun really had any recoil to speak of compared to the magnum revolvers that I had been shooting for many years.

I still scratch my head in bewilderment when people talk about how horribly painful and "Snappy"  it is to shoot a 40 caliber Glock. Which is surprising since Glocks handle recoil very well. I think the polymer frame absorbs much of the recoil and the double-wide grip distributes it over a larger area of the hand. I eventually bought a G20 and it doesn't have any recoil worth mentioning either even with the Underwood, Buffalo Bore, or Double Tap ammo.

It seems like the 40 is the caliber that everyone loves to hate and is the whipping boy of the cartridge world. And what does everyone hate about it? On one hand they say it's Short and WEAK but on the other hand they say that it's unnecessarily powerful and painful to shoot. ??? This sounds like a classic example of cognitive dissonance to me.  Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at t4eh sa e time and this must be what causes people to actually hate the 40 S&W.

[Bucky]

10 hours ago, fortyofforty said:

Only because the rules dictate that 9mm is "minor" and .40 S&W is "major", with scoring penalties for 9mm.  Remove that rule and watch what happens.  Facts, indeed.

Of course, the rules frequently dictate the caliber to shoot. Of course if you remove that rule, competitors will switch to 9mm, because capacity matters. Rules are arbitrary, and usually dictate what people shoot.

But that's not what you said. You said "nobody shooting to earn a living is choosing the .40 S&W.  The top competitors do not use it. "

[Doublestack 45]

I have no irons in the fire in this topic except what I have seen firsthand at my range IDPA/action pistol comps.

That is, a person at a given proficiency level does shoot at a higher level with 9mm than when they shoot the same course of fire, or set of standards, than when shooting a 40.  More recoil until the sights settle will always be slower.  These are people who can really shoot too, not the types who argue from moms basement.

Thats pretty much the gist of the FBI findings for those that actually comprehended the study.

 

 

[Bucky]

39 minutes ago, Doublestack 45 said:

I have no irons in the fire in this topic except what I have seen firsthand at my range IDPA/action pistol comps.

That is, a person at a given proficiency level does shoot at a higher level with 9mm than when they shoot the same course of fire, or set of standards, than when shooting a 40.  More recoil until the sights settle will always be slower.  These are people who can really shoot too, not the types who argue from moms basement.

Of course, and they would probably shoot a .22 rimfire even better. It’s all a balance / trade off. 

[Will Beararms]

A Gen. 4 Glock 22 is an easy to shoot platform. If a given person couldn’t handle it, I’d have concerns about their ability to deal with your garden variety repeat felon with a genetic predisposition to above average upper body strength. 

There are some who can handle the .40 who prefer the 9mm and I say more power to them. 

I agree that a 9mm os easier to shoot btw and fwiw.