.40 S&W or .45 ACP?

.40 S&W or .45 ACP?

  • .40 S&W

    Votes: 39 34.5%

  • .45 ACP

    Votes: 74 65.5%
  • Total voters
    113
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are there any real serious shooters of the .40? Most of the guys I see at the range shoot one box of ammo and leave, never bothering to pick up their brass. On the other hand you have the .45 shooter.... well you know.
 
re there any real serious shooters of the .40? Most of the guys I see at the range shoot one box of ammo and leave, never bothering to pick up their brass. On the other hand you have the .45 shooter.... well you know.
Click to expand...

I rarely see 45acp brass at the range. Mostly 9mm.

I'm one of the few that shoot 40sw. Like 200rds a session.
 
By the way, those videos I saw were real incidents.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I saw that one video with the Brazilian guy a long time ago (or something similar), but I have also seen it in real life. (The result, not the actual act.)

And yes, the joke went completely over my head, but there are people who get vehemently ardent about some subjects and it's hard to tell sometimes...:o

Getting old sucks.
 
Last edited:
Since OP stated it was for carry, I vote .40S&W. Main reason is ammo availability (see post #16 by Bluestarlizard - even though he voted for .45acp), and capacity.
Even though FBI is moving back to 9mm, IMHO the .40 has enough traction in LE agencies that it's longevity and availability will be secure for several decades or longer.

My EDC is either 9mm or .380acp, depending on the dress code I have to comply with, but I have a couple of EDC guns in .40 for the next ammo shortage.
 
for concealed carry, I cannot stress enough the advantages of a good load in a 9mm. But based on the question 40 or 45 I would go 45. Its not that Im not a fan of 40 ... its just if im giving up capacity i want to have a big ole bullet :)
 
here

You have any evidence that shows it can't happen?
Click to expand...

What a horse crap "report". They don't exactly demonstrate how the so-called "brain damage" was even attained by the animals. Was is it because of dying brain cells due to the animals being DEAD? What about the pressure sensors? Is it not possible that an animal would constrict muscles when shot, therefore increasing the pressure in the brain? Unanswered questions.....

Here's a question, with all the people being killed by hollow point bullets in law enforcement, where in reputable medical literature have there been instances of "brain damage" caused by "hydrostatic shock"?

None, because it doesn't exist. No wonder why Dr. Martin Fackler and the FBI experts dismiss this report as non sense.
 
But I am sure that event instigated the 45 acp.
Click to expand...
That has been the conventional wisdom for years, but Patrick Sweeney contends that the reason for the Army's insistence on the .45 was that it was more effective as a cavalry weapon--more effective on the opponent's horse.

That is said to have been the reason for the use of the "Army caliber" (.44) by the cavalry in cap and ball revolvers rather than the "Navy caliber" (.36).

Sweeney also suggests that, had the .38 Super been available, the Army might have accepted it.
 
I love the .40, it's extremely versatile. You can shoot bullets as light as 125 grains or up to 200. You can load light for plinking or full-power loads with the right powder that will approximate .357 magnum loads with over 600ft-lbs of energy.

What's not to like? I just don't get the hate for the .40!
 
You can load light for plinking or full-power loads with the right powder that will approximate .357 magnum loads with over 600ft-lbs of energy.
Click to expand...

Wait. What? 600 ft lbs of ME? From a .40? Maybe out of a carbine, using Buffalo Bore or Underwood ammo.
 
I have always chose a 40 S&W. I have a couple Glocks in the caliber. In a Glock they are a little "snappy", but just fine for me. Why 40? Bigger than a 9mm and smaller than a 45 ACP... 40 generally holds more rounds in a full sized pistol than the 45.
 
.40 S&W or .45 ACP?

Exactly, my point is the .45 shooter picks up his brass to reload, making him a serious shooter.
Click to expand...



I shoot approximately 10,000 rds of pistol a year. It's about what I can manage with a full time job, a long commute, a wife, and a house to take care of. I don't reload. Should I? Yea and I'm working on it (I have buckets of brass and if I don't take it I'm inundated with people asking me for it at the range). But I disagree that people that don't reload aren't "serious shooters". Your time is worth money, and some of us have more money than time. I know there are people that in a year will shoot what I will in 5, but even if I reloaded I wouldn't have the time to shoot that much.
 
Last edited:
BLC said:
I vote .40.



I think ammo brand makes a difference in the "snappy" recoil of .40.



I took my Shield out for the first time yesterday and fired about 50 rounds each WWB and some American Eagle. Recoil was quite manageable and not a problem. It was fun, I created some decent groups for first time with the Shield.



The last 50 rounds was a box of Speer Lawman I have had for a few years now. The recoil and flash from that stuff was no fun, down right violent in fact. I couldnt put together any sort of consistent group.



All ammo was 165gr.
Click to expand...


So, you can't handle the .40 Shield with defensive ammo. (Lawman is designed to feel like defensive ammo.)

Why would you recommend a a round or pistol that you can't handle?
 
101combatvet said:
Exactly, my point is the .45 shooter picks up his brass to reload, making him a serious shooter.
Click to expand...

LMAO!!!!! Your too funny, literally, what a joke.....:rolleyes:

Please inform us of what else makes every gun owner a "serious" shooter as well..... on the other hand, never mind, I already enjoyed your first joke.

Everybody is giving such great EXPERT advice, thoughts, and opinions on here. Amazing........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top