silverbullet6oh
New member
Hawg said:
Unless your playing Call of Dooty. LMAO!!!!
Unless your playing Call of Dooty. LMAO!!!!
.40 s&w why disliked?
- Thread starter breakthrough
- Start date
Lee - It is a double-stack, so it's big and heavy. The recoil is mild. It is accurate and I like it very much. It would not be fun to carry around all day, but it is great at the range and could be used for HD if needed.
The finish looks okay; earth-tone would be more appropriate for a dooty weapon.
The finish looks okay; earth-tone would be more appropriate for a dooty weapon.
I didn't bother to wade through all the replies, but I don't "dislike" the 40. I just never had much interest in it. Big deal. Another cartridge. We had the 9 mm, we had the 45 acp. They seemed to be working just fine. I didn't see much use for something in between so I never bothered with it.
I've never owned one, it's not for me. But, I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned. The .41 Magnum Police load and 10mm FBI load are pretty close, right? The .40 S&W is just a shorter cartridge that has similar performance. Too bad .41 AE was already out and about years before the .40 but it wasn't as common. UZIs and Jericho 941s mostly could be had in .41 AE but some conversion stuff for other guns are out there. I know there's one for 1911s. But the .41 AE was never mainstream and was forgotten once the .40 S&W came out. It used the rim of a 9mm, like the .44 Remington and the .50 AE share their rim. The original loadings were more powerful than .40 S&W. For some more fun facts, I wouldn't call the 10mm a magnum because that leads to confusion with the 10mm Magnum, AMT had guns in it. And yes the .357 sig is a knecked down .40 S&W, there's also the 9mm AE which I can't find much info. It's a .41 AE knecked down to 9mm. What little I found said it offered nearly .357 mag performance. Basically the .440 Corbon of the 9mm world. I can't find that it was ever produced. And let's not forgot the 9x25 Dillon, 10mm knecked down to 9mm.
I have hand guns in 38 Special, 357 Magnum, 44 Magnum, 9mm, 10mm, 45 ACP. None in 40 S&W.
Why?
Because I have no need.
If I need something compact for carry, my Kahr CW9 gets the call. When the weather is cool and I can layer up, I'll carry my more potent Glock 29, or Smith 686.
When I go to the range to shoot for fun, 90% of the time, a revolver comes along. If I wanna have fun with a semi-auto, one of my 1911's come out of hiding.
For me, 40 is a good chambering for things I don't do.
^Bro, if you had the .40cal KKM barrel for your G29 that I have for mine, the .40cal would offer you component bullet commonality and the ridiculous volume of FREE/EVERYWHERE brass that .40cal offers.
That is the very specific and single reason I lifted my .40cal embargo, and that embargo was in place all the way to 2013!
I can be honest -- and I am embarrassed to say it... my accuracy and follow-thru when shooting 10mm is LACKING because of my idiotic mental roadblock associated with losing my precious 10mm brass. It is embarrassing to me because it is ridiculous. Not an excuse... a personal failure that I have never completely fixed.
That barrel has helped so much with my skill behind the G29 that I couldn't explain it well enough.
That is the very specific and single reason I lifted my .40cal embargo, and that embargo was in place all the way to 2013!
I can be honest -- and I am embarrassed to say it... my accuracy and follow-thru when shooting 10mm is LACKING because of my idiotic mental roadblock associated with losing my precious 10mm brass. It is embarrassing to me because it is ridiculous. Not an excuse... a personal failure that I have never completely fixed.
That barrel has helped so much with my skill behind the G29 that I couldn't explain it well enough.
I have 9mm and .45 now. I've owned .40's before, But I keep gravitating to the 9mm and the .45. Here's why
1. In most modern handguns (Glock, M&P, XD series, Sig, HK, FN, etc.) You only get two more rounds of .40 than .45. If I think that I need more rounds, I'll opt for the 9mm, because it carries even more than the .40.
2. The recoil on a .40 tends to feel sharper than even the recoil on the .45, which affects follow-up shots. The 9mm is still the king when it comes to making quick follow up shots.
3. The .40 is not THAT much cheaper than .45, (usually $1 per box of 50) and is still more expensive than the 9mm, ammo cost isn't even an issue if you reload.
4. The .40 operates at higher pressures than both the 9mm or .45, which results in greater wear and tear on the firearm
5. With advances in modern hollow point ammunition technology, all of these rounds are reliable and in firearms and in stopping capability. I don't plan on using ball ammo for defensive capabilities, if i was, I'd carry a .45 anyways (put the biggest hole in the guy)
I like the .40 as a round, it's good, but I like the 9mm and .45 more.
1. In most modern handguns (Glock, M&P, XD series, Sig, HK, FN, etc.) You only get two more rounds of .40 than .45. If I think that I need more rounds, I'll opt for the 9mm, because it carries even more than the .40.
2. The recoil on a .40 tends to feel sharper than even the recoil on the .45, which affects follow-up shots. The 9mm is still the king when it comes to making quick follow up shots.
3. The .40 is not THAT much cheaper than .45, (usually $1 per box of 50) and is still more expensive than the 9mm, ammo cost isn't even an issue if you reload.
4. The .40 operates at higher pressures than both the 9mm or .45, which results in greater wear and tear on the firearm
5. With advances in modern hollow point ammunition technology, all of these rounds are reliable and in firearms and in stopping capability. I don't plan on using ball ammo for defensive capabilities, if i was, I'd carry a .45 anyways (put the biggest hole in the guy)
I like the .40 as a round, it's good, but I like the 9mm and .45 more.
Yes, except in some (often seen, found and sold!) loads of 9mm which is even higher pressure than 35k psi.
It is however true that all things being equal... most .40cal pistols are little more than 9mm guns chambered in .40cal and they absolutely do take more of a beating. This was the crux of my first post in this discussion.
It is however true that all things being equal... most .40cal pistols are little more than 9mm guns chambered in .40cal and they absolutely do take more of a beating. This was the crux of my first post in this discussion.
Evil Monkey
New member
oh my god no!! They'll take a beating? ooohhh my goodness how scary!
......Give me a break.
I've heard of Glock's and M&P's in 40sw going 50k+ with periodic maintenance just replacing springs every 5-10k rounds.
what's the good deal on 40sw, like $250 per thousand?
50 x $250 = $12,500 in ammo costs
If you can afford near 13 grand in ammo and maintenance costs in a $500 pistol before it blows up, you can afford to throw it in the garbage and buy another one.
Evil Monkey
New member
Just pay attention to the bottom half. I explained why a person shouldn't worry about "beating" a pistol up, didn't I?
I've never noticed any general dislike of 40SW, and I've never noticed 9mm being more available. In fact in my area, when I actually cared about what was available, 40SW was considerably more available than 9mm.
I personally wouldn't concern myself with why folks seem to like or dislike any particular caliber, nor would I base any conclusions on rants found on the web.
What I have seen is a continuous parroting of "it's got more snap" and "it's just too snappy", all of which I find to be a rather tiresome repetition of what might be initial perceptions based largely on initial preconceptions.
I did read one lengthy explanation by what appeared to be an online 'gun writer' claiming he didn't care for 40SW "and other high pressure rounds", but liked to stick with 9mm and 45. Apparently he had never browsed SAAMI recommendations for 40 and 9.
Folks should really read occasionally, instead of repeating what they've heard. This takes a few minutes to research using Google, and would go a long way to improving the signal-to-noise ratio of firearm-related information that seems to abound with misinformation and poppycock. NO...it doesn't operate at higher pressures than 9mm.
I personally think it's a short, ugly, weak little wimp of an auto pistol cartridge on the one hand, and one that's a pleasure to shoot and does about 90% of what 10mm can (with published loads) on the other.
I have found it to be a pleasure to handload, with good versatility in terms of low end to high end load, and it has even done well with 135 gr bullets and light loads, which makes it fun for IDPA and plinking. With 4756, I think it can be loaded hot and still perform well, and using 180s and fast powders I've even stumbled onto some remarkably accurate loads--that was using 'stumble' as an understatement. It has been a challenge to get good combinations that work well in certain guns.
I like it because it's dirt cheap to load, shares bullet choices with 10mm, and can pack a serious punch just as easily as it can support wimp loads that are fun and cheap.
Spouse just asked me today to buy her a carry pistol, and my choice for her would be 40SW...and I love her a lot. Far too much to give her a 9.
But I wouldn't introduce her to handgun with a little compact 40 loaded up with Gold Dots...that's just stupid. But it's not a problem with 40...it's a problem of giving the body time to learn...noise, recoil, flash. These can all be fairly severe with little compact handguns in 40. No different than giving a new shooter a Beretta Nano in 9 loaded with anything at all, and expecting the second shot to hit a target downrange. Not the way to develop an opinion on any cartridge.
I personally wouldn't concern myself with why folks seem to like or dislike any particular caliber, nor would I base any conclusions on rants found on the web.
What I have seen is a continuous parroting of "it's got more snap" and "it's just too snappy", all of which I find to be a rather tiresome repetition of what might be initial perceptions based largely on initial preconceptions.
I did read one lengthy explanation by what appeared to be an online 'gun writer' claiming he didn't care for 40SW "and other high pressure rounds", but liked to stick with 9mm and 45. Apparently he had never browsed SAAMI recommendations for 40 and 9.
Folks should really read occasionally, instead of repeating what they've heard. This takes a few minutes to research using Google, and would go a long way to improving the signal-to-noise ratio of firearm-related information that seems to abound with misinformation and poppycock. NO...it doesn't operate at higher pressures than 9mm.
I personally think it's a short, ugly, weak little wimp of an auto pistol cartridge on the one hand, and one that's a pleasure to shoot and does about 90% of what 10mm can (with published loads) on the other.
I have found it to be a pleasure to handload, with good versatility in terms of low end to high end load, and it has even done well with 135 gr bullets and light loads, which makes it fun for IDPA and plinking. With 4756, I think it can be loaded hot and still perform well, and using 180s and fast powders I've even stumbled onto some remarkably accurate loads--that was using 'stumble' as an understatement. It has been a challenge to get good combinations that work well in certain guns.
I like it because it's dirt cheap to load, shares bullet choices with 10mm, and can pack a serious punch just as easily as it can support wimp loads that are fun and cheap.
Spouse just asked me today to buy her a carry pistol, and my choice for her would be 40SW...and I love her a lot. Far too much to give her a 9.
But I wouldn't introduce her to handgun with a little compact 40 loaded up with Gold Dots...that's just stupid. But it's not a problem with 40...it's a problem of giving the body time to learn...noise, recoil, flash. These can all be fairly severe with little compact handguns in 40. No different than giving a new shooter a Beretta Nano in 9 loaded with anything at all, and expecting the second shot to hit a target downrange. Not the way to develop an opinion on any cartridge.
Last edited:
I prefer my 10 mm 1911. I have a .40 cal barrel and recoil spring. I can swap the barrel and spring and reliably shoot 40 cal. They feed perfectly from the 10 mm mag. I bought the 40 barrel/spring a few years ago when 10 mm ammo was scarce. 10 mm ammo is readily available these days so that's what I shoot.
I have a G17 and had a G22. I didn't like 40 cal in the Glock platform. It seemed to have the same amount of recoil as my G20.
I have a G17 and had a G22. I didn't like 40 cal in the Glock platform. It seemed to have the same amount of recoil as my G20.
I prefer the 10mm in anything at all. If treated fairly, it's pretty much ideal for auto pistol across the spectrum from compact to full size. I no longer think it's 'perfect' like I once did, but it's darn close.
'Perfect' I now reserve for .45 Win Mag. Which is perfect. Unless of course you want to find a compact carry for it, in which case it's not so perfect any more.
Getting back to the OP 'why do folks dislike...', I relate this to a comment a colleague made just a few months ago after I mentioned getting a 629. He said "I shot a 44 Mag once, and I didn't like it". Well, sure. I shot a 12 ga once and didn't like it either. In fact I shot it about a 1,000 more times and still didn't like it. Not until I got my 870 when I was about 14 did I start to enjoy shooting trap with 12 ga. No longer a problem with a gun that fit a 14 year old. But, if my co-worker was handed a Scandium frame 44 with over-the-top loads (our mutual friends in NorCal were fond of such buffoonery), then yeah, I suppose it wasn't a joy ride for him.
Ask a Scotch drinker if he liked his first sip of Scotch. If he says "Oh yeah!" I'm thinking he's not in touch with reality, but rather overcome with manly pride. Nail polish remover that sat in a bicycle inner tube for 25 years is what you tasted...man up.
Of course. A compromise of "I can shoot it", "I can hit something with it at 75 feet", and "I can actually have it with me when I need it".
'Perfect' I now reserve for .45 Win Mag. Which is perfect. Unless of course you want to find a compact carry for it, in which case it's not so perfect any more.
Getting back to the OP 'why do folks dislike...', I relate this to a comment a colleague made just a few months ago after I mentioned getting a 629. He said "I shot a 44 Mag once, and I didn't like it". Well, sure. I shot a 12 ga once and didn't like it either. In fact I shot it about a 1,000 more times and still didn't like it. Not until I got my 870 when I was about 14 did I start to enjoy shooting trap with 12 ga. No longer a problem with a gun that fit a 14 year old. But, if my co-worker was handed a Scandium frame 44 with over-the-top loads (our mutual friends in NorCal were fond of such buffoonery), then yeah, I suppose it wasn't a joy ride for him.
Ask a Scotch drinker if he liked his first sip of Scotch. If he says "Oh yeah!" I'm thinking he's not in touch with reality, but rather overcome with manly pride. Nail polish remover that sat in a bicycle inner tube for 25 years is what you tasted...man up.
Of course. A compromise of "I can shoot it", "I can hit something with it at 75 feet", and "I can actually have it with me when I need it".
Last edited:
When I see threads on the .40 there seems to be one constant. As soon as someone brings up the .40's extra snap and not being able to get back on target as quickly as they can with a 9mm as a reason for not having an interest in the round, they are a recoil sensitive sissy. Well no, what they are saying is the extra snap doesn't let them follow up as quickly as they can with a 9mm...lol...nothing more and I am in that crowd. The round doesn't hurt our hands, the recoil does not make us squint and think oh my goodness, hold on, its about to go off...
. Now put a .454 Casull in my hands and yes, I think why is it again that I am doing this? Oh yeh, because it is a rush that makes you grin...well for a couple of rounds anyway. Oh yeh and I can get back on target quicker with the .40 than I can with the Casull..
. Now put a .454 Casull in my hands and yes, I think why is it again that I am doing this? Oh yeh, because it is a rush that makes you grin...well for a couple of rounds anyway. Oh yeh and I can get back on target quicker with the .40 than I can with the Casull..I was wrong on #4. I think we can all agree on that. Did some quick searching to verify. Sorry about the misinformation, just a myth I've heard from enough people that I thought it was probably true.
That being said, I still have the other listed reasons for choosing other calibers first. It's not that .40 is bad, it just doesn't fit my purposes as much as the 9mm or .45ACP. If I were to find a great deal on a .40, I would buy it, but if I can find the same deal in 9mm or .45, I'll choose those first.
That being said, I still have the other listed reasons for choosing other calibers first. It's not that .40 is bad, it just doesn't fit my purposes as much as the 9mm or .45ACP. If I were to find a great deal on a .40, I would buy it, but if I can find the same deal in 9mm or .45, I'll choose those first.
Last edited: