.40 S&w

Right Tool for The Job, For You

I am fond of the .40 S&W for a lot of reasons but do not consider it a compromise round save for it's obvious place between the 9mm and .45ACP platforms; less round cap than most nines but more knock down power and more round cap than most forty-fives with less knock down power. As I've stated often, the 9mm Euro Pellet (NOT my idiom but oh, so true!) is a sub gun round to myself and most Marines who served when I did and had a 1911 model sidearm pried from unwilling, claw like hands. For the MP5 series SMGs, great. For an M9, give me back my mule puncher, Gunny!

My wife is deadly accurate with her Ruger P94 or it's companion, the PC4 carbine. We get great pricing on ammo, despite deals far more astonishing on 9mm (AMMOMAN has 9mm FMJ 115gr from Wolf for $169/1000 right now) and make every shot count.

It's all personal preference and aren't all these decisions?
 
Its recoil impulse is IMO its only technical difficulty... Blind-testing reveals the "issue").
Click to expand...

Blind testing for recoil! ha! now that's funny, I envisioned you at the range blindfolded with someone handing you guns. :-)
 
Recoil is nowhere near most internet commandos guesses. If you can shoot any service caliber than you can handle the 40. There are very little tradeoffs you encounter with this cartridge. I recommend it and only prefer the 357sig because I like velocity A LOT.
 
As I had to choose my first handgun I was not sure If I should get a 9mm, a .45 or a .40S&W until I read the numbers. For me the 9mm had a too light bullet and the .45 was too slow for me; so I got me a .40S&W and I never regret it. :D
A nice side effect is that the .40 is more powerful than both 9mm and .45.
 
Originally posted by Moloch (#25)...I was not sure If I should get a 9mm, a .45 or a .40S&W until I read the numbers. For me the 9mm had a too light bullet and the .45 was too slow for me; so I got me a .40S&W and I never regret it...
Click to expand...

Like probably most on here, I have several models in each (9, 40, 45).

Recoil is discussed a lot in this thread, but you should know that recoil is a byproduct of the variables introduced, and the effects of recoil are determined by several factors, not the least of which include the size and weight of the gun, the bullet load, and even the size, strength and experience of the shooter.

If you are trying to decide which is right for you, go to a range that rents and shoot several of each until you find the one that you are comfortable with and can generally hit the target reliably. just my $.02.

As I am sure you may have noticed, you will find endless debate in here on the attributes of each caliber, and as many people that love any given caliber as hate it.
 
40 s&w

I recently purchased a Taurus 24/7 pro in 40 and absolutely love it. I've fired many weapons in my 18yrs of service with the army, to include 1911 45's and the 92f. I found the recoil on the 40 to be less than some other 9's. our local indoor range has rental weapons and I fired the glock, and xd both in 9. The xd about ripped my arm off, i thought the guy at the counter had actually handed me the wrong weapon.

My wife shoots her hi-point 380 very well sub 2" groups at 10 & 25 ft both. She fired my 40 and fired it well noting that the recoil was relatively mild compared to the glock 9mm.

It's a great weapon handles well, fits in the hand nicely and has an on/off switch.:cool:
 
To me the recoil of a .40 cal is every bit as managable as 9mm or .45.I also agree that size of the gun does matter.I have a sig 239 and a S&W 4046 .40 cal and i have better follow up shots with my 40 cal than with my 9mm.

Personally i love the .40 cal
 
I like the .40 Sheetmetal & Windsheild...

:D

Beretta 96; 96 Centurion; Mini Cougar 8040F
DSCN0643.JPG

DSCN0642.JPG
 
My first pistol was a Ruger KP94 DC in 40 S&W. A few years later I sold it and bought my G22 (40 S&W). Followed a few years after that with my G27 (40 S&W). This past spring I bought a SW1911 45 ACP. My next pistol is going to be a G19 (9mm).

I'll never get rid of my 40's. They're my primary carry pistols. They've been rock solid. I am however using other pistol cartridges now. I have a G31 357 Sig barrel for my G22. I like the 357 Sig, but the 40 is easier to find ammo for.

To be honest though, give me a 9mm, 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 45 ACP or 45 GAP in a good pistol that I shoot well and I'll be happy. They're all good rounds in my opinion.
 
Erik saved me a lot of typing with post 15. Thank you Sir.

Beyond that, keep in mind that the .40 was a compromise from the get-go. Near-45 thump, with near 9mm capacity-and this is important-and able to accomplish this in 9mm-size guns. It succeeded and has in fact proved to be a better cartridge than I had expected. Good 180's like the HydraShok tend to knock about an inch hole through organs and fully penetrate the chest (including the sternum) with little impetus left upon exit. This is exactly what handgun rounds are supposed do- knock substantial holes through Important Stuff. Everything else is just fluff & fanfare.

I like the FMJ flat point load (Remington UMC comes to mind) well enough that I'd love to see it adopted as our military pistol cartridge.

No the .40 ain't magic, but nothing is. It simply provides a substantial amount of power without undue velocity or pressure, in guns with significant magazine capacity. I really don't know what else we can ask of a service cartridge.
 
I shoot it in a full sized Taurus Pt101(Beretta 92 type pistol).

But that's a full sized pistol.

It was'nt recoil excessive at all in my handgun.

I have been looking into Kahr's 40 caliber guns but in that sized gun,the 9mm might be a better choice for me.

Nobody can deny the 40 Smith round carries more mass and energy in a single shot to the target than any 9mm.

And with all the police,security and federal law enforcement personnel using the round,I will be glad to see the one shot stop specs come out.

They should be impressive.
 
How can the .40 be bad?

I might be a little fuzzy on this whole good/bad thing, but...

How can a bullet with the flat trajectory of a 9mm and the energy of a .45 be anything but good?
 
I like to think I gave the .40s&w a honest try. I've owned it in a Sig P229, Glock 23 and HK USPc but ended up getting rid of all of them do to the recoil being too "snappy" for me. While I do like the idea of the .40s&w, I can shoot my 9mms and .45s better so I stuck with them.
 
gglass -
How can a bullet with the flat trajectory of a 9mm and the energy of a .45 be anything but good?
Click to expand...

Comparing muzzle energy alone, the .40S&W outperforms the .45 auto.

Check this site out for a Muzzle Energy Comparator. I clicked on the Handgun 50 Feet buttons to do my comparisons. The .40 has about 10% greater energy at 50 yds. falling off to 5% greater at 100 yds according to the calculations that site uses. Mileage may vary.

Personally, after comparing using that site, I'm saving for a S&W Model 27 6" barrel .357 magnum. :D
 
I can't

shoot well with a 40.I prefer revolvers anyway,although I have some 1911's and HP's.I shoot heavier recoiling rounds like .44Magnum and .357 Magnum very well,but I could never get the hang of the .40. I am pretty good with the 45ACP also. My son has a S&W 411 that I've fired with fair results-he nails the target with it.I've owned a Glock 27 and an HK USP 40-I was a lousy shot with both.:barf:
I understand as a self defense round the 40 is highly effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top