Evil Monkey
New member
says who?
.40 s&w why disliked?
- Thread starter breakthrough
- Start date
says who?
Deaf Smith
New member
Cause some people like smaller guns.
Cause they don't need the power of the 10mm, again for the size of gun they want.
No, the answer is people don't want the size of gun the 10mm demands.
Well are you part of an 'agency'? I ain't. I don't make my choices cause some 'agency' bean counter decides what is best for their department. I decide what is best for ME. If it cost a bit more, big deal, I don't care.
Stop going by what is popular for some agency puke and figure out what works best for you.
Deaf
Because SOME shooters like 9mm these days, for SOME reason, and think that they are "everyone" for NO clear reason whatsoever.
I own, carry, and prefer a .45 ACP. I own, shoot, and almost NEVER carry a 9mm (but someone I love DOES). If I could not have a .45, I would opt for a .40 S&W or a 10mm. If I could not have one of those, I would likely be restricted to 9mm, which is why I own one.
Perhaps this has been mentioned before, but most pistols originally made in 9mm could also be manufactured in .40 S&W (Glock, SiG, S&W, Ruger, Cz, Browning, 1911A1, doo-dah, doo-dah...), without major re-engineering. This offers a significant increase in power over the 9mm, with no real change in ergonomics, and a minor decrease in magazine capacity.
One of the reasons I don't own a Browning "Hi-Power" (a term I use with tongue planted firmly in cheek) is, for the longest time, it was offered only in 9mm, and I didn't have the kind of discretionary income that would allow me to spend that much for a pistol I would only use occasionally. If the pistol could have been chambered for .45 ACP, I would have likely foregone my interest in the the 1911A1, and bought a Browning, straight away. Toward the end of its production career, it was made in .40 S&W, and I moved heaven and earth to get one, but never succeeded.
I PREFER .45 ACP over the .40 S&W, but I don't dislike the latter. For that matter, I don't dislike the 9mm. I just prefer to trust my life to sidearms that throw larger projectiles.
If someone tells me that a 9mm is superior to a .45 ACP as a cary weapon, they COULD be right, if the weapon is in THEIR HANDS. If I tell someone that a .45 ACP is superior to a 9mm, I AM right, if the weapon is in MY HANDS. If someone who cannot connect with a .45 can hit splendidly with a 9mm, they should probably carry a 9mm. But I'll wager that half of those shooters could shoot a weapon chambered for .40 S&W almost as well as they could a 9mm, and with far more authority on the business end. Ulitmately, one should carry the weapon with which they shoot best, and are most comfortable in carrying.
Cosmodragoon
New member
Another "Middle Round"...
Since I got the serious stuff out on .40 a few posts ago, there's something to be said about this. Another sort of "middle round" is the new-ish .327 Federal Magnum for revolvers. It's basically a .32 super magnum that sends a ~100 grain bullet at well over 1100 fps from 3" or longer barrels. It delivers power in excess of 9mm +p and up into the bottom of .357 magnum territory. Yet, the recoil is closer to .38 +p, you get greater sectional density, and you have an extra shot on the cylinder. If you like revolvers or live in a state with draconian magazine restrictions, it's a win.
You're basically talking about the same concept in a semi-automatic. As .327 Federal continues to gain in popularity, maybe this idea will eventually come to fruition...
Since I got the serious stuff out on .40 a few posts ago, there's something to be said about this. Another sort of "middle round" is the new-ish .327 Federal Magnum for revolvers. It's basically a .32 super magnum that sends a ~100 grain bullet at well over 1100 fps from 3" or longer barrels. It delivers power in excess of 9mm +p and up into the bottom of .357 magnum territory. Yet, the recoil is closer to .38 +p, you get greater sectional density, and you have an extra shot on the cylinder. If you like revolvers or live in a state with draconian magazine restrictions, it's a win.
You're basically talking about the same concept in a semi-automatic. As .327 Federal continues to gain in popularity, maybe this idea will eventually come to fruition...
Last edited:
Deaf Smith
New member
Or a simple 7.62x25... Or .30 Lugar.
Deaf
Deaf
The .40S&W isn't a bad cartridge.
The problem is that 9mm is good enough and is significantly cheaper.
9mm is also easier to shoot well, and offers a few more rounds in the same size magazine.
10mm is a magnum pistol caliber. It offers nearly identical ballistics to the .357 magnum. Recoil is heavy, and the ammo tends to be expensive.
The problem is that 9mm is good enough and is significantly cheaper.
9mm is also easier to shoot well, and offers a few more rounds in the same size magazine.
10mm is a magnum pistol caliber. It offers nearly identical ballistics to the .357 magnum. Recoil is heavy, and the ammo tends to be expensive.
I don't understand why some people dislike the .40S&W (or any caliber for that matter). I own four of the major calibers for semi-auto pistols (.380, 9mm, .40S&W and .45Acp) and I see a valid purpose for all 4.
Like others said, I guess most people don't like the .40 because they see no purpose for it. Others say it is the recoil. I guess I can respect that. I believe the .357SIG is a fine cartridge, and I may own a gun in it someday, but owning a few 9mms and a .40S&W I don't really have an unaddressed niche it would fill and personally have no use for it (though I have no beef with people choosing one for themselves as it is a fine caliber). Certainly, the .40 recoils harder than 9mm, and is snappier than .45ACP, but as a .357mag lover in revolvers I don't really see the .40S&W as being a particularly difficult caliber in any but maybe the lightest handguns (the main gun I shoot mine in is a compact, polymer, Taurus PT140 Millennium Pro and it is no problem, in the SIG P229 I used to have it seemed like an ideal gun/caliber combo).
For me, I see a need for all of the calibers I own (though the .380 may be debatable). The .380 is available in smaller guns than any of the others for convenient pocket carry (while I have small 9mms, and of course snub revolvers, that can be pocket carried, my Ruger LCP is smaller and lighter than them all by a long shot). With current ammo designs, the 9mm is a terrific self defense caliber, with low recoil, making it good for regular carry, and ideal for many of the small 9mm guns on the market today (I love my SIG P290RS, I don't so much love my Kel Tec PF-9, though it is small enough to compete with many .380s for concealability). Some guns made for 9mm that can be had in other calibers just seem better to me in 9mm (I love my 9mm CZ 75B, I have no interest in the .40S&W version). In the winter I prefer a larger caliber to provide my ammo effectiveness over modern hollowpoint designs since heavy winter clothing can clog up the hollowpoint and keep it from expanding. Given that, I love .40S&W for winter carry since it has more capacity (and/or can be had in smaller guns) than a .45, but has more bulk than a 9mm (though I also have a .45ACP carry gun). I think .45ACP is an ideal home defense caliber, plenty of power (for a handgun), and the large and heavy bullet provides less danger of over penetrating and going through an attacker and hitting someone else (a big consideration considering I'm in an apartment with paper thin walls and neighbors above and to both sides of me).
I'm just glad no one is making me choose just one.
Like others said, I guess most people don't like the .40 because they see no purpose for it. Others say it is the recoil. I guess I can respect that. I believe the .357SIG is a fine cartridge, and I may own a gun in it someday, but owning a few 9mms and a .40S&W I don't really have an unaddressed niche it would fill and personally have no use for it (though I have no beef with people choosing one for themselves as it is a fine caliber). Certainly, the .40 recoils harder than 9mm, and is snappier than .45ACP, but as a .357mag lover in revolvers I don't really see the .40S&W as being a particularly difficult caliber in any but maybe the lightest handguns (the main gun I shoot mine in is a compact, polymer, Taurus PT140 Millennium Pro and it is no problem, in the SIG P229 I used to have it seemed like an ideal gun/caliber combo).
For me, I see a need for all of the calibers I own (though the .380 may be debatable). The .380 is available in smaller guns than any of the others for convenient pocket carry (while I have small 9mms, and of course snub revolvers, that can be pocket carried, my Ruger LCP is smaller and lighter than them all by a long shot). With current ammo designs, the 9mm is a terrific self defense caliber, with low recoil, making it good for regular carry, and ideal for many of the small 9mm guns on the market today (I love my SIG P290RS, I don't so much love my Kel Tec PF-9, though it is small enough to compete with many .380s for concealability). Some guns made for 9mm that can be had in other calibers just seem better to me in 9mm (I love my 9mm CZ 75B, I have no interest in the .40S&W version). In the winter I prefer a larger caliber to provide my ammo effectiveness over modern hollowpoint designs since heavy winter clothing can clog up the hollowpoint and keep it from expanding. Given that, I love .40S&W for winter carry since it has more capacity (and/or can be had in smaller guns) than a .45, but has more bulk than a 9mm (though I also have a .45ACP carry gun). I think .45ACP is an ideal home defense caliber, plenty of power (for a handgun), and the large and heavy bullet provides less danger of over penetrating and going through an attacker and hitting someone else (a big consideration considering I'm in an apartment with paper thin walls and neighbors above and to both sides of me).
I'm just glad no one is making me choose just one.
jglsprings
New member
I like the heavier bullet (180 gr) - because I like to shoot heavier bullets. It's my philosophy on terminal ballistics.
The 180 grains are easier to shoot IMHO (I would like to dope slap the guy that coined "snappy" in reference to the 40 S&W - a 125 gr / 357 Magnum is snappy for God's sake, And we qualified with that round forever. But I"m older than dirt and fart dust).
I get to help out as a range officer / assistant trainer / keep the deputies from shooting themselves and each other - and since they carry 40 S&W - I do too. That way I can show them "It can be done"... Anyway... that's another thread.
The 180 grains are easier to shoot IMHO (I would like to dope slap the guy that coined "snappy" in reference to the 40 S&W - a 125 gr / 357 Magnum is snappy for God's sake, And we qualified with that round forever. But I"m older than dirt and fart dust).
I get to help out as a range officer / assistant trainer / keep the deputies from shooting themselves and each other - and since they carry 40 S&W - I do too. That way I can show them "It can be done"... Anyway... that's another thread.
Evil Monkey
New member
You're not getting anything better with 10mm either. They all pass the threshold of energy and sectional density by a wide margin needed to fully penetrate a human body. The only thing 10mm gives you is a diminishing return.
breakthrough
Moderator
Yesterday 09:34 PM poster t4terrific wrote "What are these barriers you speak of? What types of barriers do you intend on trying to kill people after shooting through?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I request ADMINISTRATORS that this poster be BANNED from this forum for saying this.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I request ADMINISTRATORS that this poster be BANNED from this forum for saying this.
I had a friend who once taught a class to prison inmates. One day he asked his class who had been shot before. A number of them pulled up shirts and showed off scars, 9mm scars. He carries a 45. True story? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm with him on the carry a caliber that starts with four philosophy
Forty SW is a great round... I shoot mine out of a K40. It's reliable and also surprisingly accurate. I have found ammo to be only slightly more expensive than 9mm.
Forty SW is a great round... I shoot mine out of a K40. It's reliable and also surprisingly accurate. I have found ammo to be only slightly more expensive than 9mm.
t4terrific
New member
What people? Who are you speaking for?
The Glock 29 is pretty small. Smaller than most .40 caliber pistols.
Every argument for the .40 simply shows that 10mm is a better choice.
You said price doesn't matter. There goes that negative against 10mm.
You said people are wimps, so there goes the recoil complaint.
10mm certainly has better ballistics than 9, .40, and .45.
You said 10mm's are too big, but most .40 handguns are bigger than the Glock 29, and 1911's and Sig's now come in 10mm too. Those are three of the most popular handgun platforms.
In defending .40, you simply made an argument that there is no use for it, and obviously that is becoming a common theme.
.40 fills a gap that doesn't need filling.
The only reason it even exists is because agencies asked for it (that's why agencies matter if you are still reading and still remember what you have already posted). Then once they got it, they figured out that it had more drawbacks with less benefits than they had expected and are returning to better calibers.
Evil Monkey
New member
i thinking about the guy who wants his first pistol today. He is better served with a 9mm or 40sw than anything else, all factors considered.
Regardless if the 40sw is a solution no one asked for, it is a viable option over 45acp or 10mm for good reason.
Personally, I ran into 40sw for other reasons. For one, I don't care about handgun calibers because their terminal performance is all the same. I ended up getting a 45acp because I anticipated getting a 45acp carbine to go with it. I wanted a 45acp carbine because 45 is subsonic and I wanted the option of SBR/suppressor in the future.
I realized 40sw can do the same thing and was cheaper, and I no longer liked the sa/da taurus 45acp I had so I bought an M&P40 and knocked out two birds with one stone.
.........Then I realized the 40sw carbines are costly and have quirks about them, so I snagged a 9mm ar15 for a very low price. Now I want a 9mm pistol to go with it.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
Many agencies are moving away from .40 SW back to 9mm. Over time this should result in less .40 SW pistol designs and more expensive ammunition as volume is reduced. It will take a long time. Probably 20 more years to be significant, but if those changes occur, I see .40 SW being considerably less popular. Not that I think .40 SW ammo will be any less available than 10MM in 100 years.