.40 s&w why disliked?

All that I know for sure is that the first semi-auto pistol that I ever purchased was a Star Firestar in .40 so many years ago when my father still held his FFL. I did as much research as I could prior to the days of the 'Algore' invented internet, and made my choice based on it being the smallest big bore pistol in current production at that time. Not to mention my father's license making it all too affordable at wholesale prices.
It was love at first squeeze for the round for me, and I doubt that'll ever fade.
 
Most of my semiautos are 9mm because the ammo is less expensive = more recreational shooting fun. But I have a few in .40s&w because it is a preferred LE cartridge by some agencies, and therefore it was more available during the last ammo shortage.

It is my understanding (may be right, may be wrong), that some LE preference of the .40s&w is due to its superiority over 9mm in being able to penetrate obstacles (vehicle windows & sheet metal, building walls & doors). That's not something a private citizen needs for self defense, but LE would need in some situations. The .357SIG cartridge fills that same handgun need for LE.
 
Last edited:
I want to know what can .40 s&w do that others can't? one old dude with extensive videos on you tube - looks like he is in 70s - is calling this a serious combat round - what does he mean by this?
 
I have always thought that .40 S&W was the answer to a question that no one asked. I personally am a .45 guy myself, but I also own one 9mm pistol. I bought it when the first ammo crisis started so I could have some ammo flexibility.

In the end buy what you want to buy, shoot it enough to be good enough to hit what you aim at, and forget the stupid caliber wars.
 
It is not a matter of dislike, the 40 is a solution in search of a problem
Click to expand...

As a 20+ year police officer, I have said this since the 40 showed up.

They took the 10mm (which was is truly where we should be) and watered it down to the point they figured out they could wedge it a shorter action. This round was an ACCIDENT. In order to get any kind of decent ballistics beyond 45 ACP, the round has to be charged up to the point is abusive to the smaller framed guns, not enough to put in a larger framed gun, and at this point in the game is behind the 9mm in terminal ballistics (which is why the FBI is dropping the 40 and returning to the 9). The terminal ballistics of the 180 are no better than those of the heavier 45 ACP rounds, with more snappy recoil and higher chamber pressures.

In my mind, I will never "warm up" to the cartridge, as the 9 is more shooter friendly with more capacity and the 45 is perfectly adequate for any SD or law enforcement need. I own exactly one 40 out of the 50 or so guns I own, and I ONLY own that one because my wife is required by her employer to carry a Glock 40 at work. If that were not the case, I wouldn't waste my time with the round.
 
When my only 40 was a lighter polymer pistol I didn't care about the caliber one way or the other. It was just something to shoot when other ammo was hard to find.

Then I got a double-stack 1911 in 40. That completely changed my opinion. That gun is FUN to shoot!

I like 9mm. I like 45acp. And I like 40 S&W too. Variety is the spice of life. :)
 
If you have a 9mm, what do you need 45 for? Unless you like 1911's, because there's no other reason to have a 45.
Click to expand...

If you shoot conventional pistol 2700 matches, you have to shoot a 45 for the 45 stage. Also 45s are, as a rule, accurate with very little work. Plus I don't ever remember seeing anyone shoot a 40 in the center fire stage. Doesn't mean it never happens but I never seen it. YMMV
 
Here is the problem with 40 SW:
You need to be a very competent well practiced shooter to shoot it nearly as fast and accurately as you can a 9mm. There are exceptions, but for most that is true. I've shot with some very practiced competitive shooters who shoot 40 faster and more accurately than I shoot 9mm, but even they will shoot 9mm faster than they shoot 40. For someone going to the range twice a year and firing a box of WWB each time, it is going to be a big difference in rapid fire.

Fire a Glock 19 and Glock 23 side by side and you will almost certainly notice the difference. forty is considerably more snappy. Of course, a couple months ago I went to the range and the girl in the lane next to me offered to let me shoot her 9mm carry piece after I let her shoot a few of my .22s. Maybe it was sexism on my part, but i was expecting a soft shooter. She must have had it loaded with some +P+ or homebrew or something. I almost dropped it after the first shot I was so surprised by the recoil. I'd shot .40s. .45s that day, but not defensive rounds. There are some pretty good thumpers on the market when you leave SAAMI specs for 9mm.
 
Last edited:
Well....

So far it hasn't turned into a versus' thread, too much. Thank goodness. I enjoy my .40 S&W, and trust my my life with it. I am sure almost every 9mm owner out there trust their life with their choice as well.

Biggest complaint with the .40 S&W, I see, is that a lot of people can't or don't want to get use to the recoil (snappy) over a 9mm, and the fact that there are usually 2-3 less rounds in a magazine than a 9mm (14-15 in a .40S&W vs. 16-18 in a 9mm). And a lot of people believe that the new technology that is available in the 9mm cartridges out there can come closer to terminal ballistics of a .40 S&W.

Do I believe it? Not really. But hey, I am just another idiot, to 9mm fans (and .45 crowd), that loves my .40S&W.

I can shoot my .40S&W accurately and feel confident in the caliber with the training and practice I do.

Most importantly is that whatever you shoot the best, is what caliber you choose (with decent terminal ballistics of course). So I believe..... but who am I to give advice, just another guy on the forum.:rolleyes:

If you want suggestions on a brand or model of what to look at, tell us what your use will be with pistol and what your budget is, or this thread will go on and on and on with suggestions that will not interest or be helpful to you.
 
There is a recoil issue to consider. I enjoy shooting both 9mm and .45acp. The .40 is theoretically between those two in terms of power but seems to recoil more than the .45. It shouldn't in terms of total energy. The issue is how that energy gets delivered to your hand. People often describe the .40's recoil as "snappy" and I think that's because the energy is delivered more quickly/abruptly.

There are different ways to address that. We've already got the recommendation to stick with steel guns. We already have some discussion of the .40 being chambered in guns designed for 9mm and I can tell you that my experience with compact polymer .40s has not been wonderful. You can also have complex spring assemblies like in the USP, which is known as a softer-shooting .40 despite being polymer. You can even dissipate energy radially as in the rotating barrel of the PX4, which I might buy in .40 if I ever stumble across one.
 
I like military 9mms and .45s. I don't have, want or need a .40, but their existence doesn't bother me.
What DOES bother me about the .40 is the fact that I have to bend over, look at, and then discard all that .40 brass that I didn't want but have mistakenly picked up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top